HATE OR DEBATE
Throughout Europe, especially Britain, so-called hate laws are passed by parliaments to stifle debate on immigration. The purpose of these inhumane anti-debate laws is not to protect minorities; it is to shield treacherous political elite from scrutiny or criticism.
Mike Walsh, who was sentenced to 6 x 4 month prison sentences for publishing anti-immigration fliers, is skeptical of government censorship and repression.
“Since my imprisonment in 1979, British government’s foreign policy, in collusion with that of the United States, has slaughtered, maimed, and made homeless millions of ethnic groups. Since the cell door slammed on me the UK government has been directly and indirectly responsible for conflicts that caused the worst humanitarian crisis since World War II.
Are we really expected to believe that corrupt political elite, whose military boots crushed liberty in a score of countries in my lifetime, gives a fig about the sensitivities of an Asian shopkeeper or Jewish moneylender?”
On October 30, British dissident Jez Turner at 13.30 attends a pre-trial hearing at Westminster Magistrates Court. The charge relates to his spoken concerns about the influence wielded by a minority with a reputation for race hate incitement. It isn’t hate, it is debate.
On November 3, six young Britons, ex-servicemen and teenagers, are brought before the Old Bailey or Westminster magistrates’ court. Their alleged offence is that they belonged to National Action. This is a small organisation that mounted sporadic non-violent protests against the UK government’s immigration policy. National Action is not an illegal organisation it is a government suppressed entity; there is a difference.
The British state’s case is unconcerned with dissent; the British state encourages Asian, African and Muslim dissent. The state is concerned that Britain’s Whites wish the same rights of protest as those practiced by immigrants and refugees.
On November 20, dissident songwriter Alison Chabloz, who enjoys an international following for her satire, is summoned to a pre-trial hearing at Westminster magistrates’ court. The Joan of Arc heretic is accused of composing lyrics and singing songs of dissent.
If hate rather than debate was the issue then why aren’t the peddlers of anti-White rap, the broadcasters of ant-White racist profanities pursued for writing and ‘singing’ anti-White lyrics in the outpourings.
On February 22, 2018, Simon Sheppard, a lone dissident, is summoned before the bench. His alleged offence is that he was outspokenly critical of noisy neighbours. Had the hapless man’s noisy neighbours been White he would not be facing the magistrates. Sadly, for Simon and the concept of free speech those he complained about are non-White.
Hate or debate? Clearly, it is the governing elite, corrupt media, spineless police and state judiciary that stands accused of hate, race hates against their own kind.
On the dates above, it is not martyred heretics who face trial. In the magistrates’ dock crouches a debauched menacing state elite. The charges against this demonic Orwellian creature relate to base treachery and anti-White race hate.
“The great only appear great because we are on our knees. Let us rise.” ~ James Larkin Statue on O’Connell Street, Dublin, Ireland.
