British Apartheid

The Sunday Times - Comment



May 02, 2004

Comment: Minette Marrin: Britain's new apartheid
makes strangers of us all



Sometimes something happens which is a perfect
incarnation of an idea, an attitude made flesh. This happened in the
unlikely person of Clive Wolfendale, deputy chief constable of north Wales,
who decided to favour the inaugural meeting of the North Wales Black Police
Association with a rap performance.
It is hard to imagine the scene, but a white
middle-aged senior officer in uniform regaled a group of policemen from
various ethnic groups with some cod hiphop about the difficulties of "bein'
in the dibble" when you're black: "You're better chillin, lie down and just
be passive / No place for us just yet in the Colwyn Bay Massive".



The bottom line was that police of all backgrounds
must trust each other and work together, to which nobody could possibly
object. But the lyrics seem to me lamentable and the idea itself even more
so.

It is not merely embarrassing that a senior
policeman chose to ape a disaffected young black rapper in front of a mixed
group of junior colleagues, whose only common feature was that they were not
white. The whole occasion was a perfect illustration of the confusion and
cultural loss of nerve in this country. It stands for all the patronage,
misguided ingratiation, guilt and double standards that bedevil the way
officialdom deals with race relations.

The case of Abu Hamza, the Egyptian-born Muslim
cleric, is an even more glaring example of this cultural funk. Known to the
tabloids as Captain Hook, Hamza is without question a serious menace to this
country.

He has been preaching racial and religious hatred
for many months in public (causing regular traffic jams in the process), and
the Home Office has for long been convinced that he is closely linked with
several international terrorist groups, including Al-Qaeda. He gives comfort
to our enemies.

At last the home secretary has decided to strip him
of his British nationality in order to deport him. However, under British
law Hamza is entitled to appeal, no matter how undesirable he may be, and
his appeal hearing was due to start last Monday. Yet neither he nor his
solicitor turned up in court, nor did he submit any evidence to support his
appeal (although he was ordered to do so many months ago).

What is the result of this astonishing contempt of
court, and of this country? A postponement of his case until January. Until
then he will be free to carry on as before.

For there are the summer holidays to consider, and
then the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, and then it will be Christmas, and
then the Treasury might kick up about legal aid but hasn't decided yet, so
really it will not be convenient to get round to dealing with this fellow
for nearly nine months.

In a moment of exquisite understatement the judge
commented that Hamza's delays were "regrettable", and the Home Office's QC
said with almost equal severity that "if he (Hamza) carries on like this,
maybe the time will come when we might be making an application to you to
dismiss the appeal".

How about tomorrow? Why this astonishing lack of
nerve? It is incredible that officialdom lacks the resolve to dismiss the
case or to settle the legal aid problem in advance or to try the man under
existing laws against incitements to violence, or even to call a witness to
court during the month of Ramadan. This is a multicultural nonsense which is
new to me and a bad precedent.

As a result, for his insolent, triumphant contempt
of the appeals court and of the manners and morals of this country, Hamza
has not been punished. He has been rewarded with nine further months to do
his worst here, unchecked, at vast public expense.

A gaggle of Christian clerics got together last week
to denounce the British National party. They did not, however, for all the
scary allegations about his terrifying secret "war cry" tapes, denounce
Hamza. The BNP at its worst has never articulated, still less preached,
anything like as bad or as racially inflammatory material as has Hamza. It
does not advocate breaking the law, while Hamza incites atrocities.

Yet it is the BNP, in divided and guilt-ridden
Britain, that excites more righteous indignation. One can only wonder what
is wrong with the sense of perspective: white bigots evil, but un-white
bigots un-evil. There seems to be one standard for white people but another
standard for others.

One can only wonder, too, at the skewed perspective
of the functionaries in Manchester who have been planning to set up a school
in Bangladesh, at British taxpayers' expense, for British-born Bengali
children who miss many weeks of school because their parents take them for
long trips to the old country to learn about their heritage and culture.

Out of respect for their lengthy cultural researches
during term time, therefore, we the taxpayers must pick up the bill for
special schooling in Sylhet.

Not only Manchester council and the local head
teachers, but also John Dunford, general secretary of the Secondary Heads'
Association, thought this was a good idea. He advised other education
authorities to do likewise.

Things are rather different here for white children
who bunk off school and for their parents. A white Englishwoman has recently
served not one but two prison sentences for failing to make her teenage
daughters go to school.

I don't suppose anyone thought to ask whether the
girls were having culturally important experiences down the shopping centre
with their mother at the time, or offered them home tuition to fit in with
their leisure activities. (I should point out that a huge proportion of
truants in this country are caught when shopping with their parents, which
is to say with their parents' consent and in accordance with their "culture"
..) In the view of the educational establishment in Manchester, at least, it
seems that there is one law for indigenous whites and another for
non-whites.

Various people who should have denounced this
nonsense have done so, including the Department for Education and Skills.
The head of the Commission for Racial Equality has condemned it. But the
fact remains that this sensibility exists and is widespread inside and
outside officialdom.

Take, for instance, the case reported last week in
Tower Hamlets of an old people's housing block that is to be built for
Asians only at public expense. It will be run by Bengali-speaking staff with
halal food and Muslim religious facilities. The council says in its defence
that it is responding to the needs and wishes of local residents, 30% of
whom are Bangladeshi.

Yet if some local residents said they wanted a
white-only, or Christian-only, purpose-built old people's unit at public
expense, they would be told that their needs and wishes were "inappropriate"
and indeed against the law. In fact there would be a massive public outcry.
Yet again there seems to be one rule for whites, another for non-whites.

What all these cases amount to is not merely
confusion or bad faith or hellish good intentions; it is nothing less than
the new British apartheid.










begin 666 grey.gif
K1TE&.#EA`0`!`( ``,[.S@```"'Y! ``````+ `````!``$```("1 $`.P``
`
end

begin 666 trans.gif
M1TE&.#EA`0`!`)$"````,P```/___P```"'Y! $```(`+ `````!``$`0 ("
$5 $`.P``
`
end

"ROBBIE-" <WAKEUPLEFTIES.TakeThisOut@HOTMAIL.COM> wrote in message news:<c744pk$hej8u$2@ID-200782.news.uni-berlin.de>...
 > The Sunday Times - Comment
 >
 >
 >
 > May 02, 2004
 >
 > Comment: Minette Marrin: Britain's new apartheid
 > makes strangers of us all


 > In a moment of exquisite understatement the judge
 > commented that Hamza's delays were "regrettable", and the Home Office's QC
 > said with almost equal severity that "if he (Hamza) carries on like this,
 > maybe the time will come when we might be making an application to you to
 > dismiss the appeal".
 >
 > How about tomorrow? Why this astonishing lack of
 > nerve? It is incredible that officialdom lacks the resolve to dismiss the
 > case or to settle the legal aid problem in advance or to try the man under
 > existing laws against incitements to violence, or even to call a witness to
 > court during the month of Ramadan. This is a multicultural nonsense which is
 > new to me and a bad precedent.
 >
 > As a result, for his insolent, triumphant contempt
 > of the appeals court and of the manners and morals of this country, Hamza
 > has not been punished. He has been rewarded with nine further months to do
 > his worst here, unchecked, at vast public expense.
 >

What pisses me off the most is that I feel like a chump. A court says
something, and like a fool, guys like me obey. While the jive ass MFs
just ignore them, laugh and them and tell them to blow in out their
asses.

All behind the garb of some higher value; defending themselves behind
the walls of religious freedom and opression.

So while the fat cats get the fancy accountants and lawyers, and the
jive ass class just goes about their business, the guy in the middle
is screwed. Effing bastards.

When the revolution comes and the shit hits the fan, there is going to
be a big explosion.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->