Where is Emma West?


by Robert Henderson

The delay suggests they are trying to wear Emma West down by extending the wait so that she will eventually plead guilty. The authorities are terrified of a full trial following a not guilty plea. The reason given for the delay – yet more medical reports – is ludicrous because they have had more than 8 months to get whatever was needed. The only other (and related) explanation I can come up with is that the medical reports are part of an attempt to take her children away from her if she does not plead guilty and they need more time to prepare social service reports.

http://www.thisiscroydontoday.co.uk/Trial-alleged-YouTube-tram-racist-Emma-West-moved/story-16543355-detail/story.html

About these ads

53 responses to “Where is Emma West?

  1. This women was very rude and should have been told to pipe down. However, a criminal prosecution was a vile thing to do – the whole philosophical basis of these statutes (going back to 1965) is wrong, FUNDEMENTALLY wrong.

  2. The process is the punishment. By the time a person has crawled their way across broken glass to get an acquital, they’ve already suffered more ruin than if they’d pleaded guilty.

    In other words, this is a Progressive Justice System working as intended.

    • Agreed Ian. “Innocent untill proven guilty” has become a farce. Argueably the practice of the “plea bargain” helped corrupt the law – “confess to a lesser charge and only…..will happen to you” ASSUMES guilt. Up till quite recently the “plea bargain” was not practiced in the Federal Republic of Germany – so it is NOT inevitable. People should be charged with what is it thought they have done – and if they have not done it they should be found innocent.

      “But the legal system would clogged up” – then there too many “crimes”, and the proceedures are unclear. For a start there should be a clear limit on the amount of time between being charged and being brought to trial and the end of the trial.

      The Great Charta’s talk of justice without delay is meaningless. How many days does “without delay” mean?

      If someone is not charged they should be released.

      And if someone is charged they should be brought to trial (within a set numberr of days) and the trail should last no longer than a set number of days.

      If the prosecution can not prove its case within a set amount of time (with all the natural advantages the prosecution has) then the accused should walk.

      English law relies on lawyers, judges and officials being people of good will and honourable conduct.

      They are not such people. Perhaps they were once – but the modern ones are not.

      The time limits should be clear, and what “the law” is should be open for an ordinary person to find out, as should the proceedures of the law.

      Presently it all relies on trust – trust in officials who are not trustworthy.

      Personally I would be the whole hog – a written code and elected judges (in freely contested – not “enlightened” elections). Up for regular (contested) elections.

      Perhaps not as good as the old guild (which is what English law used to be dominated by) – but the days of the guild a long gone.

      As for lawyers – anyone who has read a law book. If Guilds want to set themselves up – fine, as long as people can compete against them.

      After all Lincoln did not have a day of legal education – he went from working as a railroad hand to representing people in court.

      He got clients because he was cheap.

      If ordinary people can not understand the language of the law – then there is something wrong with the language of the law.

    • I agree with IanB – the process is the punishment. And the process is intended to be the punishment.

  3. It is vital that Emma remains composed and fights her case hopefully with a good lawyer and barrister.Her trial jeapourdizes freedom of speech for people speaking their thoughts however unpolitically correct her views appear,
    We were always taught the line, sticks and can break my bones but words can never hurt me,It is absurd to imprison a young woman and threaten to remove her family for what is now the most sinister crime in the UK,racial abuse.
    We have to return to the Criminal Justice Act introdced by Tony Blair and David Blunkett,admitting hearsay evidence in court,and allowing Local Athorities to prosecute and evict and isse ASBO’s to offenders of racially motivated crimes.
    My wife is still severely ill unable to defend herself from these vile allegations just down the road from the tramsto where this offence occurred.Iwas aquitted after being imprisoned and forced to pay 12000 pounds legal fees to to fight these shameful lies my wife and I were accused of in an attempt to evict us on to the streets,Without the help and support of our legal teams I cannot imagine what would have happened to us.My wife’s case is still suspended from 2006.She is represented by the Official Solicitor at enormous cost .She weighs just over 5 stone at the moment and her health is of grave concern.We were physically attecked and suffered vile abuse in an attempt to provoke a violent reaction back in june 2006.
    The answer for Emma is to instruct a very good lawyer,and there are very good one’s locally,and insist on Crown Court and trial by jury,your fundamental rights.This would be bad news with the Olympic,hence the delaying tactics.Take heart from another principal,if your accusers are found to be telling lies which in my experience they invariably are they should be sent to prison instead of you,and a good barrister will ferret the truth.

  4. Plea Bargaining in the USA has resulted in just 1% of federal cases going before a jury.

    Tony

    • I heard it was a 90% (not 99%) guilty plea rate Tony – but the basic point is the same,. The Federal system is a conviction machine – once in their hands they are most likely to convict you for something. A recent case proves the point – Lewis (“Scooter”) Libby did not “out” the CIA employee (and the lady was not a confidential agent anyway) – Richard Armitage did. The Prosecutor KNEW that Richard Armitage was the person who “outed” the women – but wanted to prosecute Mr Libby. How did he do it? “Obstruction of Justice” (the “catch all” crime – just about any action or inaction can be called an “obstruction of justice”). As for this case – both IanB and Sean Gabb are correc, putting someone though Hell (which is what modern procedure does) is a punishment – and is intended to be. It is intended to make desperate to “make a deal” (to end the torment).

  5. I suspect that it is as Mr Henderson suggests.

    Also, be mindful that those responsible for public brainwashing, realise well enough that it will not help their long-term goals if their nazi cohorts keep sending black women to prison for stating that white Europeans can’t also be black Africans. Of course we can – we can also be Martians if we want it that way. (If the good people of Mars pick this up I’m in deep shit)

  6. That it is and was never intended to be so hardly matters then. “Let the punishment fit the crime’, Gilbert wrote way back in the bad old days. But not in these good old days it seems.

    No Sean, they’ve heard of growing rumblings (I’ve rumbled plenty for a start) over the first woman and mother – in probably more than one hundred years I might add – who’s been thrown in jail for expressing a perfectly understandable frustration. Another one gaoled at this moment in time will do the multicults no good at all. Anyway, my bet is that this Emma West person is one rather tough cookie an the process is not hurting too much. Of course she has to say that it is hurting.

    I know of few men who’d climb aboard a train, hear the door shut and lock behind them, and then make enemies out of a carriage full of immigrants by calling them some rather nasty names. To do that, they’d have to be insane, blind drunk or on drugs. Whatever the reason, they’d walk free because of it.

    The language used seems to have upset more people than the objection to immigration that she was ranting about. It was the F word no doubt that has caused her to lose so much public support. That’s why the tape was played over and over and over. Which is rather odd really, when one considers how much that word is used by the media these days. The BBC use it on a daily basis but the public don’t seem to mind so much. Billy Connolly can’t get through a show without using it at every opportunity and the audience just lap it up – women in particular.

    However, if it’s uttered in an English working class dialect from where-ever then fists can easily start flying. Prince Charles using it sounds kind of ok… mildly amusing even. But then he has a problem pronouncing the word properly. Now a working man; well he puts the word to its intended use and there’s the rub. Emma didn’t quite understand the difference… bet she does now though.

    It’s all rather predictable yet rather odd at the same time… isn’t it old bean?

  7. Pingback: Libertarian Alliance Welcomes Acquittal in “Extreme Porn” Case – but Where is Emma West? | The Libertarian Alliance: BLOG

  8. All the posts here dodge the primary issue – a woman boards a train and starts raining abuse on people who have not provoked her or harmed her. If I were on the carriage I’d be annoyed that I have to face that abuse when I have caused her no harm. If its the policy of immigration that upset her why target immigrants? She should write to her MP that is assuming she can actually write! Freedom of speech does not confer one the freedom to abuse and intimidate without provocation. Emma West needs to understand that. Do I wish her imprisoned? No. But she must be made to understand and extend a sincere apology to her fellow passengers. That’s all.

  9. Agreed Steve – in that the lady was very rude.

    However, people are very rude (swear and so on) at me every week at Wicky Park.

    And I do not call the police and demand they be sent to prison.

    Being rude (as I think you agree) should NOT be a crime.

  10. “Assuming she can actually write” -Condescending liberals would never say that about a black woman

  11. FIREBELLINTHENIGHT

    “All the posts here dodge the primary issue – a woman boards a train and starts raining abuse on people who have not provoked her or harmed her”.
    No Steve – the primary issue was that she was hunted down like a witch of old and is being tried for saying what she thinks. A free society is where you have the right to offend – not to be protected from what somebody says.

  12. Steve, your ‘assumption’ is faulty. Say that to few coloured people I know and you’d swiftly be obliged to make a visual inspection of your own rectum. Complaining to the good old British bobby about the pain and time lost making the inspection wouldn’t do you much good either. Racism is a one way street.

    We’re all in it together our Eton educated leader tells us… but does he really know what a huge mess it is? I fear not. When I first saw the ‘Emma’s Rant’ film clip, above all I felt sad for her clearly bewildered child. Being forced to listen to your own mother shouting and arguing with strangers in such an uncouth fashion. It must have been so scary, yet does anyone care? Not a chance, not when racism is up for yet another illogical debate. What a thing for any young kid to have to see and listen to. However, I’ve now become more annoyed at the politically motivated and shamefully slow legal processes being used to brainwash Emma… and also the wider public. Especially so when considering that all this maddening multi-cult stuff began way, way back in 1948 and should have been sorted out within, at most, a decade by all those cowardly politicians who didn’t care much to grasp the nettle of what was soon to become uncontrolled immigration.

    All the time that has passed since then and with all the evidence and common sense gut-feelings that abound, and which all help prove that this grand social experiment cannot possibly work – yet 90% of our seemingly visually-impaired modern politicians remain unable to grasp the size of the problem or where it is bound to take us take when really hard times hit. Talk about elephants in the room. How long will it be before it all kicks off I wonder… and what are the odds being offered by the bookies on what will prove to be the touch-paper that sets us all violently against one another? White against white especially. All against one another to start off with, whilst we struggle to decide who’s side it is that we really belong. The governing Eton brigade looking on in the same kind of bewilderment that Emma’s child suffered.

    Job shortages? Youth rebellion? Police ineptitude? Hunger? Religious war? Troops being used to roundup white people for daring to demonstrate against the antics of state-backed multicultists? More Muslim sex offenders? Anger at lost homelands? At least 40 runners are in the frame for this racing gamble is my guess.

    Anyone out there prepared to make a book? I’ve a pot waiting to take whatever it is you’re offering on ‘Hunger’. Offer me 11/4 against… somebody!

    Let’s say that the race runs for 24 hours from the first mention of racially aggravated fighting – and or looting – reported via television or by a leading daily. It will conclude with any mention in the media (whatsoever) of food shortages being ‘believed’ to have brought about dissent via violence or looting by any members of the public of whatever racial origin or status.

  13. The actual serious issue is one of free speech. If the same message was said by a TV network would there be a prosecution? When NBC referred to white people as “white trash” was there a prosecution? Or when the Guardian referred to poorer white people as “trailer trash” was there a prosecution? Or when the Rt Hon John Major referred to homeless people as “eye sores” was there a case against him? The issue is one of free speech. The Crown has been challenging free speech for years.

  14. Yes Frontier News – rudeness is not a crime. Apart from in the Legal Positivist sense (Thomas Hobbes and co) that holds that anything the state does not like it can declare a “crime”, as the word “crime” just means “something the state forbids” (that reminds me of the Calvinist or Islamic view of God and ethics – if God says something is good, then it is good because “good” is just anything that God declares to be good, and the same with the word “evil”).

    Freedom of speech has been under attack in Britain since at least the Act of 1965 – and the (Frankfurt School of Marxism in origin) doctrine of “Political Correctness” gets stronger every year.

    There is a terrible mad folly among some people – a “if we can not beat them we will join them” folly.

    It was seen with Edward Heath in his refusal to stand up for freedom of speech and freedom of association (which must include the freedom NOT to associate – i.e. not to employ or trade with if one does not wish to do so) in the 1960s and 1970s when there was still a good chance of repealing the key statutes. And I would blame Mrs Thatcher also – as I remember well the hopes in 1979 that freedom of speech and freedom of association would be restored. Yet there were just speeches denouncing this or that aspect of “political correctness gone mad” refusing to accept that it is the PRINCIPLE itself that is wrong – not some “taking it too far”.

    [Of course freedom of association, although not freedom of speech, is directly attacked by some parts of the American Civil Rights Act of 1964 – Jim Crow was evil, but “two wrongs do not make a right”, laws forbidding trading in certain ways with blacks should not be replaced with laws making such things COMPULSORY).

    Today we have to the point where even some people who call themselves libertarians talk of the principles of collectivists (such as “hate speech” and “social justice”) as if they were a positive thing that could be made to fit with traditional liberty – trying to pretend that things that are utterly opposed can be reconciled (rather like the folly of “compatiblism” – the claim that things that are clearly incompatible, determinism and moral responsbility, can be made compatible by the exercise of AUTHORITY, not reasoning, by philosophers).

    The principle of “hate speech” and the principle of “freedom of speech” can not be reconciled (any more than “social justice” can be made to fit in with its sworn enemy – traditional justice). One has to choose between them.

    Accepting the principles of the enemy (in a desperate, Heath like, effort to seem “modern” and “relevant”) must lead to intellectual defeat – because it is, in fact, intellectual suicide.

  15. Where is Emma West?

  16. Justice delayed is justice denied.

    I used to be proud to be English; I’m not so sure any more.

  17. Other nations are often no better. The attacks on Emma West are terrible – but the attacks on Nancy L. are even worse.

    The subtle snearing (smearing) in the American press started it – and the British press (the Daily Mail and so on) have carried it on to a vicious extreme.

    Where are the femminists?

    A women, Emma West, is attacked (indeed threatened with prison) for being rude and uneducated (Buck V Bell is clearly not dead).

    And another women (Nancy L.) is savagely attacked (“gun nut”, “paranoid” and …..) when the women is actually a victim.

    What we are seeing is the establishment elite standing in line to spit on the memory of a dead women – a women totally unable to defend her reputation.

    Disgusted with Britain?

    I am disgusted with the world.

    By the way – according to everyone who actually knew her, Nancy was a kind and generious person. But truth seems to have no importance.

  18. Is Emma West still awaiting trial? This is a scandal. Justice delayed is justice denied – how can the courts routinely impose such a long period between arrest and trial?

  19. There should be strict time limits on the period between charge and trial – and over the length of trial.

    “That sounds like Scots law”.

    If it does – then so be it.

  20. If Emma had been a Muslim there would have been serious rioting over this.

    Ordinary decent people aren’t organised, that’s the problem.

  21. One difficulty is how vague these statutes are.

    For example, if I report that Pakistani forces mutilated the body of one the Indian soldiers they killed today (they took his head as a keepsake – the other soldier had less large scale mutilation) – and say that I regard what they did as a disgusting thing to do. Is that an “attempt to incite racial hatred” against people of Pakistani heritage in Britian? And thus illegal under the Race Relations Acts of 1965, 1968 and 1976 – and the Equality Act of 2010?

    Or was it the fact that Emma West cursed (used naughty language) that is the criminal offense?

    The whole thing is baffleing.

    These vague statutes make the concept of the “rule of law” a mockery.

  22. I couldn’t agree more. You’ve summed it up very nicely Paul. Sadly, the current crop of professional politicians now in charge of England’s rapidly fading democracy have gone mad. Quick to award themselves lots of lovely cash from the public purse yet, evidently, un-willing to do the wider public’s bidding. The same goes for civil servants too I’m afraid; for there seems not to be an ounce of honest gumption between the lot of ‘em.

    Make no mistake, the wound showing in England’s side will prove mortal. It will not self-heal. Harsh lessons need to be re-learned. So re-erect the scaffold lads. Sharpen the blades. Roll out the tumbrils. Remember always, that In order to recover from a drastic situation drastic measures are needed. Let mothers’ cry – if they must.

  23. I may have mentioned this before – but it certainly worth mentioning again…..

    We have not, yet, reached the point the Pakistani legal system has.

    In Pakistan blasphemy is a capital offense – one is executed for it.

    However, if words constitute blasphemy they may not be repeated (not verbally and not in writing) – even in court.

    So trials consist of witnessess saying so-and-so said a “bad thing”. Was it very bad? Oh yes – very bad.

    At this point a legal system – eats itself.

    The Governor of Punjab complained about this system (with people being executed for saying…. well the legal system does not actually know what they are supposed to have said….),

    So one of his own bodyguards killed him.

    The television news presenter (by the way a lady – and Western educated) had a “phone in” in which viewers were asked whether the bodyguard …….

    Was a hero.

    Most of the callers thought he was.

  24. Paul: You cannot be serious!

    You’ve made that crap up. It cannot be true. It’s bullshit written to further wind me up. I don’t think I’ll run with it though because I’ve downed a few drinks already and simply don’t care about stuff. There having fun over at the Raccoon Arms though. Guns and stuff. You’d called – I noticed your tankard sitting on top of the washer.

  25. As the Japanese say “if only that were so…”

  26. I read yesterday(10/01/13) of another unfortunate ‘tram experience’ resulting in a woman being hit in the face. I commented on all these stories online highlighting Emma west’s plight still awaiting trial 14 months after her alleged offense. Guess what none of them were printed. Why did the media make all that initial hue and cry only to ignore the story ever since?

  27. unless you have been a black person for a day and experienced that racism they get day to day. none of you have the right to say its out of order sending her to prison, freedom of speech and all that.

    As far as i remember freedom of speech has a limit and then it becomes racism. This girl needs to learn when to keep her mouth shut even if she doesn’t like black people why does she have to shout her mouth off on a tram. It’s not cool and i hope she gets what she deserves.

    People are still living in the 50′s like blacks are alien’s. Since then there has been a 150% increase in mixed race babies being born. Doesn’t that show these idiots that we are in a new generation were we can all live together even if you have your views you don’t need to create drama when its not needed.

  28. Yes, I note your point but many working class people in england get treated that way, one important point concerns the fact, we have a dual problem with this issue in the UK, with black people also being racist against whites, in Emma’s case, her behaviour is no different from what I have personally witnessed by black people in london, Of course the main concern that has surfaced with Emma’s case, is the fact she is being exploited by the justice authorities for reasons of PC, all observers of justice have a moral responsibility to ensure justice is implemented fairly, irrespect of the persons skin colour, in this case many people hold the veiw quite rightly, Emma is being subjected to harsher treatment, than some black people who have committed this type of crime with violence, this has nothing to do with racism, but rather ones moral responsibility to speak out at injustice, many people who have witnessed the reality of this problem, identify these concerns, people are concerned about Emma and her right to identical justice identical senario alleation, this is why people are concerned about the treatment she has suffered in the hands of the justice authorities, we have to have a level playing field in this area, hence the problem, Emma has been identified as being subject to over zelous treatment by the authorities, inrelation to others who participate in identical acts!

  29. I agree with you Karl. White working class people ARE discriminated against. Not that it makes any kind of racism right but you are quite correct to point out that regardless of sex, race or religion everyone should be treated the same and at the moment the bias shown by police and judiciary is definitely against the WWC where minorities are concerned. The most scandalous example I can think of off-hand is a white couple seriously assaulted in the street without provocation by some drunken Muslim girls who walked scot free on the grounds that being Muslim they were unused to alcohol.

    Compare that to the treatment Emma West is still receiving after more than fourteen months.

    And there are plenty of other examples like that.

  30. Charley, do you know what it is like to walk in a black person’s shoes?

    Perhaps you should declare your interest.

  31. This is exactly the point, at the moment we have a court system that is discriminatory, if two people committ an identical crime they should receive identical treatment, at the moment the court services appear to do what they like, I have seen black people get rediculously harsh sentences, for a crime where a white person gets a slap on the wrist, and in some cases a white person getting a harder sentence than a balck person, the implimentation of justice by the british courts is irregular, and inconsistent, Emma’s case this gives a clear example of how the PC brigade expliot these loopholes, this is the main problem.

  32. Of course my own serious concerns, relate to the way the courts are used
    by the government to target any political opponents OR critics of the system
    in it’s current format, we all now it contains serious elements of racisim
    discrimination against minorities, injustice in the hands of a sickly upper
    class and outdated paramilitary police force. We all se cases where middle
    class white criminal acts don’t even make it to the court room, yet a black
    person or white minority would end up in court, found guilty and shipped
    off the local prison at first opportunity, the system is full of corruption
    forged evidence, suppression of evidence, political maliciousness,
    from my point I would love to see it dismantled ASP.

  33. Of course the reason for the delay in Emma’s case would probably be a premeditated move to pressurize her to plead guilty, I know from my own experience, they use delay, and psychologial tourture during these proceedures if they are unable to get what they want, harassment, emotional blackmail, wealfare blackmail, are all tools they use within the British prosecution proceedures, no doubt as she has fallen into the mental health arena, she will probably be subject to abuse by the prosecution shrinks, threats of section, broadmore, ect, these are all tatics they use, in my case when trying to sue the police and the court coroner for wrongful republican alleagtions, i was blackmailed on numerous occassions, the justice system is an evil pyschological tool, when it comes to extracting confessions or trying to obtain a guilty plea, people must resist this temptation, what ever forms of tourture they decide to impliment at all costs , no doubt the first thing they did was threaten to take her child, this is one both the Social Services and authorities use a lot to control people, at the moment, as well as make threats of detention for attempting to challenge the court, obviously being involved with the “Shrinks” is not good, they normally use these when they have an impossible chance of sending someone to prison, they normally fabricate medical records in order to get round the legislation, obviously at the moment, they are running scared, hence the trumped up charges and the delay’s, at the end they will try and argue mental case and try and get her that way, we must just wait and see!

  34. Of course as I have said, the justice authorities do use pyschological pressure
    in order to obtain confessions, people must be strong never confess to any crime via pressure or blackmail by the police, say nothing! I pray Emma has that strength in relation to the “Woodentops” trumped up charges, these
    are evil people who use “Blackmail and Violence” to silence and muzzle
    victims when they have broken the law.

  35. @ charley

    In your opinion Emma West is a racist but you are only saying that because she is white. Anti-racism is a code word for anti-white.

    Charley maybe you should be a white working class english woman for a day and see what it feels to experiences the ongoing GENOCIDE of her race through mass non-white immigration and forced assimilation that will blend the English people out of existence.

  36. Excellent point Simon. Anytime a white person gets out of line or speaks a truth, the anti-whites yell, “you’re a rayyciss”. It’s so childish.

    Thank you for speaking out about White Genocide. Everywhere I go I hear people starting to speak out.

    They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-White.
    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White.

  37. True. I see White Genocide everywhere I go. It really does seem that Whites are going to go extinct from blending with the 3rd world. Genocide.

  38. Well this has being going on for some time, where have you all been!It is
    something that is not going to change, mass immigration changes the
    society we once knew, once changed it does not return to a previous
    state of economic social existance, not forgetting the religious changes
    that effect and influence society. Yes we are heading for a third world
    living standards.

  39. Fact is Emma is english, we have a responsibility to ensure her legal rights
    and right to a fair trial is preserved, and this is what shall be done!

  40. The british justice system has been taken over by “Criminals” “Fraudulent
    Accountants” and middle class power drunk pollitical psychopaths, who
    think they are above statue or sense of moral justice.

  41. Agreed! Such Intuition.

  42. Karl certainly the anti-whites have virtually wiped out the native English population in London, but that in itself is no argument for continuing the genocide of the white English through mass immigration and forced assimilation.

  43. Of course what you say is true, but I am not priminister, I have no power to change the policies of government, I wish I did, You must remember this, and only this, it is the government who have created the situation, and they continue to do so on a daily basis, seven day’s of the week, I will not disclose the real figures for immigration under Cameron, why, because this you already know! I don’t accept their arguments on integration, I do want to be integrated with people who criminalise people for having the odd glass of sherry, or punish woman for removing their clothes, frankly not my idea of democracy, Emma was lucky she was on a train, in the back alleways of London she couuld have suffered a far serious fate in certain parts of London, if the court wants to do anything for anyone, they should be able to identify her symtoms of culture shock, it might be for the good of all if she were moved to a new area where she could recover with her child and rebuild her life, there is no life sentnece for her outburst, it was no more than that, I now culture shock when I see it, having the past fourtune of travel, I do believe on that day, this in part played causation, we have to
    accept the police and court service are parasites, their employment comes
    solely from the proceeds of human misery, and corruption. of course you
    say white genocide, I think not, extinction would be a better word, rest
    assured, when the final line in the sand is drawn, there will be those who
    stand and fight at the temple of Acre if history so dictates!

  44. Whites are the indigenous people of the British Isles and yet can’t even speak up in their own defense over their dispossession.
    If Emma had been any brand of non-white she would have had great support from many liberal organizations.
    This shows the hypocrisy and how we are dealing with a White genocide program here.
    How is this not genocide:
    White countries are being flooded by non-whites. Whites are told to be TOLERANT. Whites are forced to integrate.
    With assimilation we see the extinction of one race only, the White race. Its not funny, not comedy, its white genocide.
    Anti-racist is a codeword for anti-white.

  45. Well of course whites are the indigenous people of the British Isles, I thought everbody knew that. The reason nobody speaks out in their own defence over dispossession is this and this alone, we have a bastard totaliterian government in this country, and a corrupted paramilitary police force, anyone who expresses democratic opinion on political matters can find themselves arrested and subjected to retribution on the grounds of racism. Wake up, this country is not a democracy, it is run by dictators, people in england live in fare of the state police and government, not without due cause. The indigenous race are all talk, when it comes to the crunch they dear not speak out, they now the discrimination and living hell the authorities will enduce if they attempt to contradict the British government dictatorship policies, the majority will not take such a risk and give challenge.I must conclude you know little about Britian or it’s state political machinery by the sound of things! You get the sack here for being a member of the BNP or having an opinion, let’s not forget, thats what they call a democracy, although I would not join such a party myself, people should be allowed to if democracy claimed by the government were real, and not just some false perception, Cameron falsely portrays to the world audience britain is a democracy, what rubbish!

  46. Of course imagine the horror of living under the rule of a communist dictatorship, democracy in britian is even worse, Peirs Morgan came under heavy fire in america when he tried to induce gun control, in england, such people get their way on everything one man control of a country. we have a ping pong political system in england, either a labour red tape dictatorship, or a corrupted conservative victorian one, that’s the way politics works here, decade, after decade, with no real prospect of ever seeing any poitical change

  47. Of course I watched the gun debate that took place on US TV with Piers Morgan with interest. If one had put forward arguments to the authorities here the same way as US citizens did, you would indeed without doubt find yourselves sectioned under the Mental Heath Act, and being treated for the condition of causing political unrest.