THE DEATH OF FREE SPEECH

by Eddy Morrison
 

“April the 4th, 1984. To the past, or to the future. To an age when thought is free. From the Age of Big Brother, from the Age of the Thought Police, from a dead man... greetings.”  - George Orwell, 1984

 

Introduction
When George Orwell (Eric Blair) penned his titanic book '1984' in 1948 and shortly before his untimely death, he probably guessed that within a few short decades - the era of 'Big Brother' would indeed in some form or another descend on Great Britain. (In '1984', the UK is called 'Airstrip One'). Only twenty-seven years later the first nail in the coffin of Free Speech was hammered in by the 1965 Race Relations Act - and the era of the Thought Police was ushered in.

This first unjust law was considered by the then Labour Government which quickly introduced the 1968 Race Relations Act which changed racial 'crime' to criminal rather than civil. Subsequent strengthening of this tyrannical law was brought in with the 1976 Race Relations Act of 1976, then the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000. This was again reinforce by certain provisions in the Terrorism Acts of 200 and 2006 (mostly nothing to do with repression of White Nationalists - on the surface - but some parts have shocking implications regarding freedom of speech, thought and expression).
In 2005, after a lot of battling, our Marxist Labour Government forced through a Religious Hatred Law which is almost unworkable and seems to be specifically designed to protect mainly certain 'sensitive religions'. The Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill currently working its way through parliament will, under a nasty little section (Section 16) of the Bill, outlaw criticism of homosexuals and transvestites. This was pushed in through the back door (no pun intended!) by that master of free speech suppression, the arch-Zionist Jack Straw. This same Stalinist type wanted breaking the Race Act WITHIN ONE'S OWN HOME a criminal offence! The only way this would be possible is if members of the family or CCTV cameras were installed in every house in the land and believe me I am firmly of the opinion that if Straw could get children squealing to the police on their 'racist' parents - he would be one happy tyrant indeed!

In this booklet I shall be investigating each stage of the continuing oppression of Free Speech; what we can do to combat it and how far more importantly we can get the British people to wake up to this tremendous erosion of their liberty and freedom of thought.
We shall look too as the morality of these laws and whether they are actually legal under European Law? Do White Nationalists and for that matter, White People have Human Rights and the right to free expression is that reserved only for minorities - again we look in more depth at these matters.
Eddy Morrison (2008)

 

One

The repression begins

It is often stated that Magna Carta in its sixty-one very varied points which King John ratified is the true guarantee of freedom in Britain. A reading of the Magna Carta or ‘Great Charter’ shows no such thing. The Charter is quite a mish-mash of ideas and mostly protects the great Earls and Barons of the day as well as the high clergy from the monarch. There are also other odds and ends thrown in – two points in fact would get the people who drew up the Charter in severe trouble with British Law today, in that they state that any man or his widow who dies whilst owing debts to a Jew, then his successor has no obligation to pay that debt.

Such oddities as this show the Charter to be quickly and haphazardly thrown together – in no way does it guarantee free speech and is inapplicable today.

Similarly, when we state that Great Britain has no Bill of Rights to protect individual freedom we are correct. Britain does in fact have a Bill of Rights dating back to 1689 – however on closer examination it turns out to be a Bill of Rights for Members of Parliament and is still used today to protect parliamentary privilege – it DOES NOT offer any protection of free speech for the ordinary Briton.

The fact is we urgently need a new Bill of Rights and/or a Citizens Charter guaranteeing all true Britons freedom of speech, thought, action and association. The BPP is pledged to introduce such a Bill.

In the 1930’s – up to 1936, free speech was about 90% guaranteed on just about any subject. The growth of the British Union under Oswald Mosley so alarmed the Establishment that they brought in the 1936 Public Order Act.

The Public Order Act 1936 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom passed to control mainly Nationalist political movements such as the British Union, though it has been used against individuals and organisations of today. It was updated in 1986.

The Act banned the wearing of political uniforms in any public place or public meeting. It also required police consent for political marches to go ahead (now covered by the Public Order Act 1986).The Act also prohibited organising, training or equipping an "association of persons ... for the purpose of enabling them to be employed in usurping the functions of the police or of the armed forces of the Crown," or "for the use or display of physical force in promoting any political object."

The act also affected peaceful organizations, such as the Kibbo Kift, a youth scouting movement.

This robbed the British Union of three key assets – political uniforms which were attracting young Britons in their thousands to the British Union, the ability to effectively steward one’s own meetings – an organised stewarding core which would have to be both trained and fit now being banned – these powers were given to the police – the result being that Communists and Red thugs have often been able to attack White Nationalist meetings without interference. It also severely curtails our right to march and demonstrate.

With the 1936 Public Order Act, the first nail had been placed in the coffin of free speech.

 

Two

The first Race Act

From the end of the Second World War until the introduction of the first piece of suppressive legislation in the guise of the 1965 Race Relations Act, British Nationalists within reason could say whatever they pleased about immigration. The slogans “Keep Britain White” (often shortened to KBW) and “Free Britain from Jewish control” was often and openly used especially in two big rallies in Trafalgar Square in 1960 and 1965. No one would dare hold rallies under those slogans now!

 

(Trafalgar Square has been a virtual no-go area for White Nationalist meetings since). When the Nationalist Alliance a few years back applied for a rally under the theme ‘Rights For Whites’, I was amazed when ‘Red’ Ken Livingstone wrote back with an application form granting us the rally – with the proviso that we provide £5,000,000 insurance surety! Cathie of the NA did sterling work ringing up dozens of insurance brokers – nobody would touch us. I do believe that every rag tag and bobtail ethnic or Commie outfit who regularly get the Square have to provide this. The slippery Livingstone knew it obviously. The BPP has not given up on the idea and it may be that at some time we will have to just defy the ban and turn up and hold a rally anyway. I have already had a letter from Livingstone’s office threatening immediate arrests should White Nationalists try and hold a rally without permission (which we would NEVER GET anyway – another example of the denial of our Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Assembly).

 

The 1965 Act brought in on the eighth of December that year was repressive yet mild in the light of what was to follow.

The new Race Relations Act comes into force making racial discrimination unlawful in public places.

The new act forbade discrimination on the "grounds of colour, race, or ethnic or national origins" in public places and covered both British residents and overseas visitors.

There were immediate claims by anti-racist groups and Labour backbenchers that the new law did not go far enough, as it did not cover housing or employment. (Bring on the Thought Police now emerging!)

The new law did not make racial discrimination a criminal offence - and only the very worst offenders will be referred by the Attorney General to county court.

Conservative opponents of the law forced the change from a proposed criminal offence to a civil offence.

They feared making racial discrimination a crime would only exacerbate race relations in areas where it was already a problem. (- and in hindsight – it has!)

But Labour backbenchers wanted the new law to go further to penalise employers who discriminated against applicants on the grounds of race, and local authorities which barred people renting council homes because of their ethnic background.

The new law applied only to "places of public resort" which include hotels and restaurants - but excluded private boarding houses.

Shops were also excluded from the new act.

Acts of discrimination included refusing to serve a person, an unreasonable delay in serving someone, or overcharging.

 

The Race Relations Board (now the Commission for Racial Equality – overmanned, over-paid and monolithic) was established in 1966 and published its first annual report in April 1967 calling for the act to be extended to cover discrimination in housing, employment and financial facilities such as mortgages and car insurance. Of the 327 complaints made to the board, 238 were considered to be outside its jurisdiction. Mark Bonham Carter was appointed first chairman of the Race Relations Board. He served as a Liberal MP from 1958-9 and later became vice-chairman of the BBC. He was an uncle to the actress Helena Bonham Carter.

 

In October 1967 a 17-year-old member of the National Socialist Movement was found guilty at Middlesex Area Sessions in the first case brought under the incitement section of the Race Relations Act. The law was tightened up in 1968 when racial discrimination was extended to include employment and housing. It was further extended in 1976 when for the first time it identified direct and indirect discrimination and also established the Commission for Racial Equality.

 

The most dangerous part of the 1965 Act was the fact that ‘incitement to racial hatred’ became a crime in 1965 in the first Race Relations Act (followed by a second act in 1976, and subsequent amendments); with some modifications it is now part of the Public Order Act (1976). We will look at this and the 1968 Law in the next section which brought on the first major race trial against White Nationalists.

 

Three

The screw tightens!

The December 1967 Race Bill became effective law in early 1968. This had a much stronger “incitement to racial hatred” amendment put in. At first it was necessary for the prosecution (read ‘persecution’?) to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the accused wished to incite racial hatred. The word ‘likely’ – that nauseating catch-all term had yet to be introduced.

 

In 1968 the Racial Preservation Society was a South of England White separatist group concerned deeply about the effects of mass non-White immigration.

As well as publishing a number of books and pamphlets, the RPS also produced a regular newspaper, The Southern News, generally filled with news about immigration. The group was prosecuted under the Race Relations Act in 1968 at Lewes crown court but won the case. The case was not proven and all four accused – all members of the RPS walked free (the stress of the trial caused one patriot to die of a heart attack). The Labour Government and the witch hunters of the fast developing Race Industry were appalled. They had expected a sure fire conviction and suddenly found that there was a hole in their tyrannous legislation. Hence the frantic race to get the word ‘likely’ into the legislation. The Public Order Act too has been amended to include the words ‘likely to cause a breach of the peace’ – basically a licence for the police to arrest anyone!

 

The Race Relations Act 1976 was established by the British Parliament to prevent discrimination on the grounds of race.

Items that are covered include discrimination on the grounds of race, colour, nationality, ethnic and national origin in the fields of employment, the provision of goods and services, education and public functions.

The Act also established the Commission for Racial Equality with a view to review the legislation. The Act incorporates the earlier Race Relations Act 1965 and Race Relations Act 1968 and was later amended by the Race Relations Amendment Act 2000, notably including a statutory duty on public bodies to promote race ‘equality’.

Enoch Powell's Rivers of Blood speech is believed to have been largely inspired by this then-upcoming legislation, and specifically refers to it.

The word likely had appeared with a vengeance and all patriots from then on had to watch every word written or said.

Some early casualties were Robert Relf (born 1924) is a far right British 'race martyr' who briefly became a cause célèbre for the tabloid press in the 1970s.

Relf first came to national attention in 1976 when he advertised his house in Leamington Spa as being 'For Sale - to a white family only'. Relf was found to be in breach of the Race Relations Act and was jailed for contempt of court when he refused to take it down. Relf's plight was taken up by the tabloid press as an example of the now recognised draconian nature of race legislation and there was an outcry that Relf was imprisoned for his actions.

National Front National Activities Organiser, Martin Webster was fined under the Race Act whilst prominent NF members Martin Wingfield and Joe Pearce (leader of the Young National Front) were both jailed for writing the truth about Race. In Pearce’s case he was jailed twice for articles in the YNF paper ‘Bulldog’. It was at these trials that an Establishment judge made the now notorious and extraordinary statement that ‘the truth is NO defence’!

From 1976, every piece of British Nationalist literature had to be very carefully produced with a constant eye on the repressive Race Laws which the witch-finders like MP Greville Janner were continually trying to tighten. We thought then that things couldn’t get much worse. However we had another 2006 Race Law to face followed by a Religious ‘Hatred’ Law – one of the most unworkable and ridiculous pieces of legislation an already lunatic parliament could produce.

 

Four

…and it gets worse!

The truly diabolical remits of the 1976 Race Relations Act and its subsequent amendment with the 2000 Race Relations (Amendment Act), together with certain provisions in the anti-terrorism laws – designed to combat Islamic Fundamentalist terrorists such as Al Qaeda – are being used against White Nationalists for the most innocuous reasons.

Notable British Nationalists who were under these anti-Free speech laws in the 1980’s and 1990’s were the then British Movement Leader – Michael McLaughlin and also BNP Leader, John Tyndall as well as British Nationalist editor, John Morse. Many other less prominent patriots were also jailed, fined and harassed.

The emerging White Power music scene was not exempt either with both bands and distributors being arrested over music CD’s. Some White Power musicians were fined and others jailed.

Another notable offence has been tacked on to the already ‘arrest everyone’ Public Order Act. This is the attachment of the dreaded words ‘racially aggravated’ to any incident – or certainly the vast majority of incidents – involving Whites and non-Whites. A simple domestic argument which would have normally been ignored or perhaps resulted under a small fine becomes a ‘Hate Crime’ when differing races are involved.

‘Using words or behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace’ normally means a fine if found guilty. ‘Using racially aggravated words or behaviour’ may well result in imprisonment.

I myself in 2006 was charged with just this offence and for a short while it looked serious. However it was eventually thrown out as a load of nonsense. I was lucky. Others have not been.

For example a White man was charged with ‘racially aggravated revving of his motor-car’ (can you believe that one!). A member of the BNP, Kevin Hughes was arrested and jailed – his story makes interesting reading as a prime example of State Repression of White people:

“Mr. Kevin Hughes, 46, a joiner, charity organiser (with royal commendations for his efforts for motor neurone disease), a married man and a member of the British National Party, was in an altercation with an Iraqi asylum seeker in December 2004.
This is Kevin's version of events:

Whilst walking along the road an Iraqi Kurd fell into step beside him. After a few minutes Kevin asked the Iraqi where he was from. Kevin claims he meant nothing more by this than an interest. People often ask an obvious foreigner where they are from. In fact. people will often ask a fellow Briton to identify a dialect.
The Iraqi took exception to this however and hit Kevin in the face with no other provocation. (The police doctor viewed the bruise on Kevin.)
In self defence Kevin pushed the Iraqi away, by the shoulder. He made no mark whatsoever on the Iraqi. Kevin then walked away. The Iraqi complained to the police that Kevin had assaulted him and racially abused him. He said that Kevin had asked him if he was a Muslim.
This was the sum total of the 'racial abuse' in the charge that Kevin denied totally.

There were no witnesses to this altercation. Somehow the police were able to identify Kevin from a description and find him remarkably swiftly. Kevin was arrested and charged with racially aggravated common assault.
Within 10 minutes of his being arrested the police said, "You're a member of the BNP, aren't you?"
The case came to court in March 2005. The police had lost all the paperwork and the district judge threw it out. Three months later Kevin received a letter saying that charges were being resumed and, in May 2006, the case was heard in Worcester Crown Court. The charges had been upgraded to religiously and racially Aggravated Section 47 Assault.
The police (allegedly) lied in court, saying the Iraqi had a graze on his forehead, however they produced no doctor's report and no photographic evidence to prove this accusation. In fact Kevin is a big man, 6 foot 2, well built and very fit. If he had hit the Iraqi the man would likely have been hospitalised.

To begin with the judge discredited the Iraqi in Court, finding discrepancies between his original statement and the evidence he was now giving; asking why he needed an interpreter when he claimed to have understood Kevin in the street and then gave a description of him, in English, to the police.
At this point the prosecution revealed (although they had said that they wouldn't) that Kevin was a member of the British National Party.
The judge immediately changed his tune and insisted that Kevin tell the jury about BNP immigration policies, in spite of Kevin not being an executive member. The judge said, in court, that, although there was no factual evidence and no witnesses, he had instructions from the Home Office to make an example of racist behaviour and he then went on to jail Kevin for 30 months.
Pre-sentencing reports were not allowed and no one was permitted to speak on Kevin's behalf. “

An incredible story – but one which is becoming a daily occurrence.

 

In 2006, the Marxist New Labour Misgovernment eventually – using the little used Parliament Act – steamrollered through a Religious Hatred Act. This was to cover a lot of promises to their Asian voters that Religious Hatred would be cracked down on. Even some Muslims opposed this ridiculous piece of legislation! In this instance it is clear that it was only the neo-Communist Labourites who wanted this Act – no other race or religion was demanding it!

Religious Hatred? How the hell do you apply that in for instance the following scenario:-

 

A group of Satanists belonging to the established ‘Church of Satan’ (and there is one!), break into a Christian Church and hold a Black Mass. They are roundly condemned by the local Christian community as barbarous lunatics. Now who has broken the law? The Satanists for holding a Black Mass in a Church thus insulting Christianity or the Christians for calling the Satanists abusive names which could lead to a likelihood of religious hatred being stirred up! Crazy situation we know but not beyond belief when such equally crazy legislation finds its way onto our Statute Books.

 

The Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill now working its way through Parliament has had a sly clause (Clause 16) in it – put in by the arch-Stalinist and master of repression Jack Straw, proposing that criticising homosexuals and transvestites will now constitute a ‘hate crime’! Where next I have to wonder?

 

CONCLUSION

For the first time White Nationalists discovered a free highway for the dissemination of White Nationalist ideas – this was the fact that White Nationalists have a huge presence on the Internet. Free speech was back in play and still is but the powers that be – throughout the world – are now attacking the right of we White Nationalists to freely use the net. Already Germany has jailed leading revisionists including Ernst Zundel for website material as has the Australian authorities against the Nationalist ‘Adelaide Institute’. 

Pending trial this year is the case of British Nationalists Simon Sheppard and Luke O’Farrell for articles on the Heretical Press – despite the fact that the site is based in America and covered by the First Amendment to the US Constitution guaranteeing freedom of speech and information.

This will be a watershed case and Mr. Sheppard is facing no less than nineteen charges under the Race Act! Should the defendants lose this case it will be a savage blow to a White Nationalist presence on the Internet.

Another thing that is seized by the Anti-Racist Thought Police is all computer equipment if they raid a patriot’s home –whether he or she has been charged or not. They are often held for months even though no charges have been brought or will ever be brought. This causes disruption and disturbance to the National Movement – exactly what our ZOG controlled System wants! It also intimidates family members of patriots including children in the hope this will stop a British patriot from continuing in the Struggle.

So far Britain has escaped anti-Holocaust Denial Laws, and we can still investigate the subject freely but how long before that too is clamped down on?

 

On the face of it we are protected in our battle for Free Speech by the European Convention on Human Rights – but the European law governing this Convention has so many get outs that White Nationalists have effectively NO protection under European Law – though a test case would bring this into sharper focus.

 

In the end our task as White Nationalists is two-fold. Firstly and as a top priority, the battle to have all the Race and Public Order Laws repealed must be fought at every level. Secondly, the White British public must be made to wake up – quickly to the undermining of their basic rights of freedom thought and expression and the only way to do this is through mass propaganda and agitation. I hope that this booklet, short though it is will reach a wide audience.

Until we can throw of the shackles of the tyranny of the Race Laws we will never get the truth out to the White masses we so urgently need on our side!

 

“Those who profess to favour freedom and yet depreciate agitation, are people who want crops without ploughing the ground; they want rain without thunder and lightning; they want the ocean without the roar of its many waters. The struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, or it may be both. But it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand; it never has and it never will.” – Douglass

 

“None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free.” –Goethe

 

"The reason men are silenced is not because they speak falsely, but because they speak the truth. This is because if men speak falsehoods, their own words can be used against them; while if they speak truly, there is nothing which can be used against them - except force."
John Bryant