BNP seeks enforcement of hate-speech law against pro-Islam activist for inciting hatred of Jews
people living under tyrannical “hate-speech” laws do? Demand that these laws be enforced consistently, not just against whites and Christians? Or seek their repeal? It’s a tough problem, when it seems that the only available recourse against extremist Muslims is the hate-speech laws. However, as I write following Nick Griffin’s letter, below, the problem is soluble, and in the very terms that Geert Wilders has recently laid out.
John D. writes:
I had a conversation with Pat Richardson of the BNP after her speech at the Preserving Western Civilization conference. In one breath in her speech, she mildly complained about the totalitarian EU hate speech laws. Then, she went on to applaud Nick Griffin for using those same hate speech laws to complain about the content of a speech that was given by Lauren Booth at the Muslims for Gaza rally in Blackburn in January. I asked Ms. Richardson if she were in favor of the hate speech laws or against them. She said that the laws were the only legal grounds on which they had to complain. I’m sure you see the obvious dilemma.
Here, sent by John, is Nick Griffin’s letter
making the hate-speech complaint:
The following letter has today been emailed and posted to Chief Constable Steve Finnigan at Lancashire Police HQ, Preston.
For Urgent Attention, Chief Constable, Lancashire Constabulary
17th January 2009
Dear Chief Constable Finnigan,
I wish to make a formal allegation of incitement to racial hatred, contrary to S.5 of the Public Order Act, whereby it is an offence to use words intended or, having regards to all the circumstances, likely to incite racial hatred.
The offence was, I believe, committed by Lauren Booth in the course of her speech to the Muslims for Gaza rally in Corporation Park, Blackburn, on Sunday 11th January 2009, a copy of which may be found on the BNPtv footage posted together with my analysis of the speech and situation on the main news section of www.bnp.org.uk on Saturday 17th January. [LA adds: Lauren Booth is a pro-Palestinian activist and half-sister of Cherie Blair.]
As you should already be aware, this rally was attended by many thousands of mainly young Muslim men, already in a high state of anger as a result of media coverage of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict in Gaza. As one of Britain’s leading experts in this particular piece of legislation, I have no doubt whatsoever that there is a prima facie case against Ms Booth. In particular, her use of the plural in the phrase “you are the criminals we detest”, juxtaposed with comments such as “we want Israel out of this country”, (not, please note, “the Israeli Embassy”, but simply “Israel”) are clearly likely—if not intended—to be taken by those present as a green light for hatred, indeed quite possibly actual physical violence, against individual Jews and against Jewish businesses in our High Streets.
That she intended mischief is indicated by her deliberately setting out to enrage the audience with stories—totally fictitious as far as any news reports coming out of Gaza would suggest—of “chemical weapons” being used by Israel in the targeted attacks on Hamas terrorists which she presents as random attacks aimed at innocent women and children.
Given the deep-rooted traditional hostility to Jews, simply on account of their being Jews, in the Koran and the Haddith, to make such a speech to a large Muslim audience can only incite hatred against Jews; the legal threshold of ‘likelihood’ cannot fail to be crossed.
If it should be that a ‘softly softly’ policing policy meant that you did not feel able to station a police video team in the park to capture speeches as evidence in the event (clearly foreseeable under the circumstances) of incitements to violence or racial or religious hatred, then you only need to ask and BNPtv will supply you with the original footage recorded by our camera crew in the park. Although it is shaky it is clearly audible throughout and the speaker can be very clearly identified.
I am also told that Wayman Bennett of the criminal conspiracy operation ‘Unite Against Fascism’ addressed the same rally and said, among other provocative statements that “Israeli Jews should go back to wherever they came from—New York or wherever it is”. I have not seen this footage myself, but urge that you also investigate this.
As the Gold Commander during the 1981 Burnley riots, you must have a very good appreciation of the very serious danger involved here, with outside agitators doing their very best to increase tensions in Blackburn. Should the situation in Gaza not be permanently resolved very soon, it is highly likely that Ms Booth’s call for a far larger demonstration in the town will be answered. That being the case, it is vital if the peace is to be maintained and the law upheld that the police force take action now to show that incitement to racial hatred and violence is unacceptable not only if the alleged victims are Pakistani Muslims, but also members of other races and religions.
I look forward to hearing that you have set in motion the appropriate action very shortly, not least because—as my analysis which accompanies the video makes clear—we do not have much time left in which to damp down the growing hysteria and alienation being produced by agitators such as Ms Booth.
PO Box 14
[end of Griffin letter]
First, of course, let’s not pass over the notable fact that the BNP is now defending British Jews from incitement to hatred and violence.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at February 26, 2009 12:30 PM | Send
Second, the dilemma that John D. describes can be resolved by distinguishing between speech that “incites hatred or discrimination” and speech that incites violence. This is now Geert Wilder’s position, as discussed here. Laws prohibiting speech inciting “hatred or discrimination” are inherently tyrannical and should be repealed. Laws prohibiting speech that incites violence should remain on the books. And let us remember that the essence of the message of the Koran and hadiths as regards non-Muslims is incitement to violence, as Griffin points out.