Duke: British Arrests are an Attack on White Freedom
Opinion; Posted on: 2004-12-14 15:31:58 [ Printer friendly ]

Freedom of speech is under attack in the West.

by David Duke (pictured)

I HAVE KNOWN Nick Griffin for many years and his arrest, along with the arrest a few days ago of another friend of mine for many years, John Tyndall, speaks clearly to the fact that we are losing our freedoms in the West!

Although I believe that our Christian nations have the right to remain Christian and that Europeans must have the right to stop the massive immigration that is destroying our heritage and freedoms, I have a respect for other religious viewpoints than my own Christian faith. I certainly don’t want Europe and America to become Muslim any more than Arabs would want their own nations to become Christian. Furthermore, I think we all must work to end this conflict between Islam and the West, a conflict exacerbated by the Zionists who seek to use it for their own strategic advantage on behalf of Israel.

It is not Muslims who now dominate our media and government policies, it is Jewish supremacists. It is not even Muslims who have changed our immigration policies that have caused this conflict in the first place, but Jewish organizations which have relentlessly worked to break down our borders while supporting Israel as a Jewish state. In fact, we Europeans have much in common with the Palestinians in that we are both occuppied by the same powers. It is not just the banks of Jordan River that are occuppied by Zionists, it is also the banks of the Potomac and the Thames!

They dictate much of our national policies, such as the Zionist orchestration of the Iraq War through the government and media in Britain.

Although I agree with Mr. Griffin on 99 percent of the issues, I would not have used the language of Mr. Griffin on Islam. However the fact that a leader of a political party can be arrested, imprisioned and threatened with a seven year prison term for simply for uttering critical comments about a religion is a naked suppression of free thought and speech. Apparently this can only occur in criticizing other religions than our own; for instance, think of all the thousands of articles that have accused historical Christianity of being murderous and warlike.

Another clear example that comes to mind is the many thousands of books and articles that accuse Christianity of historical and contemporary anti-Semitism and intolerance. Is the British government going to arrest all the Jews and Gentiles who have written vicious attacks against Christianity? Or how about Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Wiesel’s comments that Jews should set aside time every day to exercise their righteous hatred of Germans? Do you think he will be prosecuted? Or should he be?

The fact is that criticism of individuals, organizations, governments, religions, peoples is at the very root of free speech. If you can’t make criticisms you simply don’t have free speech. If we had secret cameras going around filming the offhand comments people make about groups other than their own, the government would have to put everybody in jail.

How can Tony Blair and George Bush talk about freedom and bringing it to the Iraqis, yet at the same time jail a leader of a political party for excercising his right of free speech?

Not only are the enemies of our heritage orchestrating policies that will result in the genocide of our people (a destruction of our genotype), now they are working to imprison anyone who simply dares to oppose our extinction.

I urge all European-Americans to support our brothers Nick Griffin and John Tyndall in their fight for freedom. Their fight is our fight. The truth is that their fight is the fight of everyone who believes in freedom of speech, conscience and expression – the very basis of what we commonly refer to as “freedom.” –David Duke

Original article

http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=4345

http://www.nationalvanguard.org/images/teaser/duke_mic.jpg

[QUOTE=heaven above]Duke: British Arrests are an Attack on White Freedom
Opinion; Posted on: 2004-12-14 15:31:58 [ Printer friendly ]

Freedom of speech is under attack in the West.

by David Duke (pictured)

I HAVE KNOWN Nick Griffin for many years and his arrest, along with the arrest a few days ago of another friend of mine for many years, John Tyndall, speaks clearly to the fact that we are losing our freedoms in the West!

Although I believe that our Christian nations have the right to remain Christian and that Europeans must have the right to stop the massive immigration that is destroying our heritage and freedoms, I have a respect for other religious viewpoints than my own Christian faith. I certainly don’t want Europe and America to become Muslim any more than Arabs would want their own nations to become Christian. Furthermore, I think we all must work to end this conflict between Islam and the West, a conflict exacerbated by the Zionists who seek to use it for their own strategic advantage on behalf of Israel.

It is not Muslims who now dominate our media and government policies, it is Jewish supremacists. It is not even Muslims who have changed our immigration policies that have caused this conflict in the first place, but Jewish organizations which have relentlessly worked to break down our borders while supporting Israel as a Jewish state. In fact, we Europeans have much in common with the Palestinians in that we are both occuppied by the same powers. It is not just the banks of Jordan River that are occuppied by Zionists, it is also the banks of the Potomac and the Thames!

They dictate much of our national policies, such as the Zionist orchestration of the Iraq War through the government and media in Britain.

Although I agree with Mr. Griffin on 99 percent of the issues, I would not have used the language of Mr. Griffin on Islam. However the fact that a leader of a political party can be arrested, imprisioned and threatened with a seven year prison term for simply for uttering critical comments about a religion is a naked suppression of free thought and speech. Apparently this can only occur in criticizing other religions than our own; for instance, think of all the thousands of articles that have accused historical Christianity of being murderous and warlike.

Another clear example that comes to mind is the many thousands of books and articles that accuse Christianity of historical and contemporary anti-Semitism and intolerance. Is the British government going to arrest all the Jews and Gentiles who have written vicious attacks against Christianity? Or how about Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Wiesel’s comments that Jews should set aside time every day to exercise their righteous hatred of Germans? Do you think he will be prosecuted? Or should he be?

The fact is that criticism of individuals, organizations, governments, religions, peoples is at the very root of free speech. If you can’t make criticisms you simply don’t have free speech. If we had secret cameras going around filming the offhand comments people make about groups other than their own, the government would have to put everybody in jail.

How can Tony Blair and George Bush talk about freedom and bringing it to the Iraqis, yet at the same time jail a leader of a political party for excercising his right of free speech?

Not only are the enemies of our heritage orchestrating policies that will result in the genocide of our people (a destruction of our genotype), now they are working to imprison anyone who simply dares to oppose our extinction.

I urge all European-Americans to support our brothers Nick Griffin and John Tyndall in their fight for freedom. Their fight is our fight. The truth is that their fight is the fight of everyone who believes in freedom of speech, conscience and expression – the very basis of what we commonly refer to as “freedom.” –David Duke

Original article

http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=4345[/QUOTE]

Good to see fellow White people standing up to support us.

Good job, David Duke.

See below for a suck ass job of 'speaking out for' freedom of speech (actually telling us we can't have it):
Freedom of speech means being free to give offence
(Filed: 15/12/2004)

Some of Nick Griffin's pronouncements on race and religion, for which he was arrested yesterday morning, are extremely stupid and nasty. They give offence to all civilised Britons, of every religion and none, who value our country's tradition of tolerance. Most of all, the leader of the British National Party has offended British Muslims by apparently condemning Islam as a "vicious, wicked faith", and making rude and highly questionable remarks about the contents and meaning of their sacred book, the Koran.

We have the greatest respect for devout Muslims, and the passion with which they defend the name of their prophet, Mohammed. They have every reason to feel offended by some of Mr Griffin's remarks, made at a meeting of BNP zealots and secretly recorded and broadcast by the BBC in July. We have grave doubts, however, about the extent to which offensive speeches on any subject should be matters for the law.

Freedom of speech means nothing, after all, if it is taken to mean only the freedom to express views approved by the Government, or those that nobody finds offensive. If the term is to mean anything, it must surely include the freedom to give offence.

There is clearly a cast-iron justification for our ancient laws against incitement to violence. In some countries, there may even be a case for outlawing the expression of certain opinions. One can readily understand, for example, why it was made a criminal offence in post-war Germany to deny that the Holocaust took place. At the time, the possibility of a Nazi revival seemed a real threat to civil order and to the survival of the new republic. But in these islands, no such arguments apply for banning stupid and offensive remarks.

Until we hear the case against Mr Griffin - if any is to be brought to court - there are three observations that ought to be made. First, why did the West Yorkshire police think it necessary to send four plain-clothes policemen to arrest the BNP leader at dawn at his farmhouse on the Welsh border, in the week before Christmas? Here is a man who has never made any secret of his longing to be arrested, and to have his martyr's day in court.

The police say that, since July, a team of officers has been working 10 hours a day, five days a week, watching videos handed to them by the BBC. Is there so little crime in West Yorkshire that they have nothing better to do with their time?

The second observation is that it is a very serious matter to arrest the leader of a political party for stating his opinions - no matter how unpleasant we may find them, or how misguided we may think the 800,000-odd voters who backed the BNP at the European elections in the summer.

The third is that there are surely far more effective ways of silencing Mr Griffin and his kind than the law and the threat of prison. The most effective weapons in the liberal arsenal are argument, scorn and public ridicule.

Article16 July 2004
Blowing up the BNP
Media exposés like the BBC’s The Secret Agent have helped to transform a ragbag party into the talking point of British politics.

by Sandy Starr

The far-right British National Party (BNP) has become the focus of media attention once again, following the broadcast of the BBC's undercover documentary The Secret Agent.

The documentary is the product of a six-month investigation by reporter Jason Gwynne, who infiltrated the BNP and then covertly filmed its members expressing just the sort of moronic, bigoted opinions over a drink that you would expect them to.

'I heard the BNP leader Nick Griffin give a speech inciting racial hatred and the founder, John Tyndall, inciting racial hatred
*and I heard some awful anti-Semitic remarks'*
, says Gwynne. As one critic says: 'Next, he will be telling us that he has discovered strong evidence of Roman Catholicism in the Vatican.' (1)

While the results of Gwynne's investigation may not be surprising, it is now being suggested that some of the BNP figures featured in the documentary should face prosecution, especially since two of them appear to confess to forms of criminal assault and intimidation.

It is legitimate that these possible crimes should now be investigated, having been brought to light by Gwynne's documentary. More dubious is the suggestion that BNP leader Nick Griffin should also be subject to some form of prosecution, for being filmed calling Islam a 'vicious wicked faith' - something which, in a free society, he should surely be entitled to say (2).

Yet under the headline 'Arrest them', today's Sun says that Griffin should be given 10 years inside for preaching a 'warped message of hate' (3). The ease with which those commenting upon this affair conflate some BNP members' claims that they committed physical assault with others' expression of objectionable views is very worrying.

Griffin has protested that 'it's still not illegal to criticise Islam' (4). In principle he is right - though given the recent introduction into law of concepts such as 'hate speech', 'hate crime' and 'incitement to racial hatred', it is debatable whether he is right in practice. Incitement is an especially woolly category that conflates speech with action, and which can be used to pursue censorious agendas. The response to the BBC documentary suggests that many today make little distinction between words and actions, and believe that the expression of certain views should be as punishable as committing a violent act. The consequences for freedom of speech are as obvious as they are worrying.

One commentator complains that The Secret Agent 'failed to answer the really interesting question about the BNP: why, knowing what we all know about the nastiness of the party, did some 750,000 Britons vote for it in this year's European elections?' (5) The fact that the BNP continues to win votes in various elections - most recently in this week's council byelections - is something that the political class finds extremely disconcerting.

The makers of The Secret Agent seem to hope that their documentary will show BNP voters the error of their ways; the Sun newspaper's front-page and editorial coverage of the documentary (headline: 'BLOODY NASTY PEOPLE') expresses a similar hectoring purpose in relation to its readership (6).

The irony is that it is precisely programmes like The Secret Agent that help to build up the BNP into a national political force, rather than any qualities possessed by the BNP itself. Gwynne's film showed that the BNP has little going for it by way of politics, policies or convincing arguments; you would be hard-pushed to find an individual as lacking in charisma as Nick Griffin. Yet the media's obsession with Griffin and his party has helped to transform the BNP into the big talking point of British politics.

Most of those who vote BNP do so, not because they are hardcore racists or because there is anything attractive about the BNP, but rather as a way of giving two fingers to the mainstream parties. When large numbers of people feel turned off by party politics - and when the best reason that the mainstream parties can give for voting is that if we don't the BNP will get in, a kind of electoral blackmail - is it so surprising that some express their disaffection by voting for the BNP?

The more we talk up the threat from the BNP, the more we divert public attention to it that it doesn't deserve. And the more we seek to restrict the free speech of the BNP and others we don't like, the more censorious our political culture becomes.

The best way to grapple with BNP cranks is not to agonise over them and give them yet more publicity through TV and newspaper exposés, but to debate them head-on - the quicker that we might dismiss them, and move on to debating something more interesting.

The secret agent showed once again that the BNP is a cesspit of racism, anti-semitism and “criminal levels” of violence. “On a barrister’s advice”, a constant mantra of the programme, the vile comments we heard uttered by various BNP members were deemed “threatening, abusive and insulting” - in the legal sense.

BBC lawyers must have sat up pretty smartish when they watched the demented John Tyndall - BNP founder and would-be fuhrer - constantly taunt Michael Howard by calling him “Michael Hecht” - a reference to the Tory leader’s Jewish-Romanian original family name. Tyndall continued his Hitlerian attack on “Hecht”, fulminating: “This interloper, this immigrant or son of immigrants, who has no roots at all in Britain, has the effrontery to talk to us about what is alien. It is not the BNP that is alien.” In a grandstanding finale, Tyndall ‘did a Kilroy-Silk’ and affirmed that Africans have only produced “black magic, witchcraft, voodoo, cannibalism and Aids”.

Of course, the section of the programme which has attracted the most attention is where Nick Griffin, the BNP’s Cambridge graduate leader, tells cheering supporters that islam is “a wicked, vicious faith” and ventures into theological exegesis - claiming that the Koran tells muslims to rape white women and children, to “take any non-muslim woman you want”.

It is no accident that Griffin made this speech in Keighley, West Yorkshire - where it has been widely alleged that Asian men are ‘grooming’ under-16-year-old white girls for sex. This allegation became the basis for a Channel Four documentary, which was withdrawn at the last minute at the request of the police, thus inevitably fuelling paranoia amongst those who want to believe that there has been a cover-up by the ‘pro-Paki’ media and police.

Gwynne actually referred to the withdrawn documentary in The secret agent, saying that white men were involved in the ‘grooming’ racket as well, but apparently this was not the thrust of the girls’ testimonies. Naturally, this is all food and drink for the BNP, which found a real live-wire issue to exploit, hence Griffin’s demagogic appeal at the Keighley meeting: “You’ve got to stand up and do something for the BNP because otherwise they [the muslims - EF] will do for someone in your family.”

Significantly, during his outburst on islam and the Koran, Nick Griffin went on to say that if he expressed such viewpoints in public he would face a seven-year jail sentence and even went on to dare David Blunkett to prosecute him: “If Blunkett wants to put me on trial about whether we’re entitled to warn about the dangers of islam, I will be absolutely delighted.”

Griffin’s goad is well timed, if nothing else. In the past few weeks there has been renewed talk of ‘updating’ the Public Order Act and, more pertinently, the Race Relations Act, so that incitement to “religious hatred” will be on an equal legal par with incitement to racial hatred - ie, a criminal offence. The current ‘race hate’ laws incorporate religious groups only if they can be classified as a distinct ethnic minority community - such as Jews or Sikhs.