by Chauncey Tinker – 6 Sep 2017
I came across this short video clip of Godfrey Bloom voicing some good old-fashioned common sense on the subject of hate crime:
For those of you who don’t know, Mr. Bloom is a former UKIP MEP probably most famous for making numerous “politically incorrect” comments and who consequently suffered a degradation ceremony at the hands of the Glozi MSM.
Hate crime legislation was first introduced into the UK with New Labour’s Racial and Religious Hatred Act of 2006. This was supposedly necessary in the wake of first 9/11 and then the 2005 London Bombings (7/7), because Muslims were supposedly coming under a lot of attacks and special legislation was supposedly needed to particularly protect them. The legislation stipulates the use of much longer sentences in cases where the crime committed is deemed to have been motivated by hatred of particular groups. Gradually the list of groups supposedly deserving special protection has been getting longer.
Hardly a day goes by now when some legal controversy relating to disproportionate sentencing does not occur thanks to this legislation, for example see this case reported in the Daily Telegraph from just yesterday where the “hate crime” label bizarrely was NOT applied:
Asian grooming gang’s rape of white girls not racist, rules judge
Terrible crimes occur such as the violent beating of a 2 year old child which resulted in brain damage and probably permanent disability, yet the criminal only got 14 years. How is this not a “hate crime”??? (Hate crimes get much longer sentences).
‘Manipulative’ babysitter, 34, left a ‘bright, happy’ two-year-old girl with brain damage after beating her so violently it looked as though she’d been in a 70mph car crash
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4857102/Babysitter-left-two-year-old-girl-brain-damaged-jailed.html#ixzz4rul3rxZy
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Amber Rudd (the current UK home secretary) is an enthusiastic cheerleader for hate crime prosecutions. Is this because she is very stupid, or is it because she is a useless cynical career politician who sees identity politics as a tool for her own self-advancement? I’m not sure which it is, what do you think? (Please share your opinion in the comments below).
“Hatred has no place in a Britain that works for everyone and we are determined to stamp it out,” the Home Secretary said.
“I am pleased to see Government action is working and that more victims are finding the confidence to come forward to report these crimes.
Funnily enough she was herself reported to the police by an academic who felt one of her speeches constituted a hate incident:
“Amber Rudd’s hardline speech to Conservative party conference recorded by police as ‘non-crime hate incident’ after academic’s complaint”
For most sensible people this would have been a wake up call prompting them to wonder if “hate crime” legislation might not be a good idea after all, but obviously there is some psychological and/or political motivation behind Rudd’s support for this divisive law.
The UK’s female Prime Minister is also a cheerleader for the hate crime agenda:
Prime Minister Theresa May gave a message of support for Hate Crime Awareness Week 2016.
Promotions like this one have the effect of raising awareness of the fact that the police are giving special priority to “hate crimes” and therefore the number of people reporting “hate crimes” is artificially boosted because more people are aware of the concept and how to report it. The Glozi MSM then triumphantly proclaims that hate crime is dramatically on the increase, which raises awareness even further, and therefore the number of reported incidents spirals even more.
It is really a bizarre phenomenon to see our politicians behaving apparently with such a herd mentality, one is tempted to think the Idiocracy is already upon us. There have been claims of “hate crime surges” in the wake of both Brexit and President Trump’s election, claims which have not survived closer scrutiny.
There have been some claims in the MSM that women are being subjected to a great deal of hateful online abuse, although apparently an awful lot of the abuse is being directed at just one individual – Diane Abbott:
We tracked 25,688 abusive tweets sent to women MPs – half were directed at Diane Abbott
Since she does seem to engage in race-baiting herself, I think we should probably report her for one or two hate incidents as well.
Alison Saunders who is in charge of the UK’s Crown Prosecution Service could perhaps be described as just following the orders of her political masters, but it seems to me she is doing so with quite a lot of enthusiasm.
Overall then, why are all these females in positions of power so in favour of this terribly divisive legislation that is undermining one of the most important principles of British Justice – the principle of equality before the law? Is it possible that they see it as a weapon that is somehow useful for the political advancement of their own kind (useless female career politicians)? If the police are now to be more preoccupied with catching “racist” and misogynistic online verbal abuse instead of solving real crimes, will this have the effect of suppressing opposition to diversity quota legislation for example? A fanciful theory perhaps, maybe these particular women are just simply stupid people, its hard to know which.
Slightly off topic, but while we’re on the subject of hate crime, here is an interesting case that caught my eye:
Muslims condemn ‘divisive’ Islamophobic posters plastered across Worcester by far-right British Renaissance Policy Institute
The poster simply said this, nothing more:
PROTECT CHILDREN – fight grooming gangs
Quote from the article:
Police are treating the posters as a hate crime and the Worcester Muslim Welfare Association has condemned the posters.
They say the ‘mischievous’ posters are aimed at dividing a peaceful community in Worcester.
It seems very odd that the title of the news article should describe the posters as Islamophobic. We have been reassured that grooming gangs have nothing to do with Islam, and there is no mention of Islam in the posters. The claim was made apparently because the writing in the poster vaguely suggests Arabic writing, but that seems to me to be a bit thin – hardly enough reason for the police to elevate the matter to the status of a “hate crime”. Unless of course grooming gangs are now considered to be one of the special groups deserving special protection from hate crime legislation? This case seems more than a little bit odd to me, an example of the rising hysteria created by the “hate crime” agenda. The police are being encouraged to pursue anything that can be deemed a “hate crime”, and this is distorting the way they operate, as Mr. Bloom suggested. It needs to stop.
All so-called “hate crime” legislation must be repealed at the very first opportunity. It is extremely divisive and therefore counter-productive, since it was invented supposedly to REDUCE division in society.
What do you think? Do you hate Amber Rudd? Please leave a comment below.