“To my mind that was the right verdict,” says Griffiths, who believes the trial was driven by the “politics of race”. “Questions have to be asked as to the propriety of bringing this prosecution based on the evidence they had. The officer in charge of the investigation said he couldn’t discontinue the case because it would have a damaging effect on the Met. That has to be a reference back to Stephen Lawrence: they couldn’t have another unexplained death of a black child in south London. This was their opportunity to redeem themselves.”
…”Whereas I was exposed to blatantly racist and discriminatory attitudes when I entered the profession, to claim that that has been the case in the last 15 years would be a lie. I wouldn’t be chairman of the Bar’s Public Affairs Committee if it were so. I feel part of it – and I’m very much pleased to be so.” If that sounds complacent, his absorption into the establishment remains partial. His comments on the recent furore over criminality among young black men, which erupted after the editor of the black newspaper The Voice urged the police to extend their use of stop and search, are carefully worded but caustic.
“There are issues to be addressed around crime within black communities, and I think those black communities are starting to throw up these questions themselves,” he says. “But throw into the equation David Blunkett’s plans for reforming the police and you can perceive why a police force which sees itself as being under attack sees an advantage in creating a moral panic to keep their political masters off their backs.”
When cultures clash in a climate of fear by Ian Buruma:
Immigrants, sometimes from the old colonies, are the pious ones now. They still have the religious fervour which the host countries have rejected.
This can cause problems. Think of the Muslims in Britain, burning effigies of Salman Rushdie, and calling for his death. Or think of the difficulties in France of integrating veiled Muslim girls into the secular education system. Think of the young people born in Europe, who are forced to marry people from villages thousands of miles away, and the fate of some who refuse.
The tendency of our political elites has been to dodge these issues. On the left, even raising them meant you might be branded as a racist, while some on the right would like the rest of us to emulate the stricter ways of immigrant parents. The Rushdie case, for example, was an occasion for some conservatives to call for tighter blasphemy laws.
The clearest instance of this is the Dutch populist, Pim Fortuyn, who wants to halt immigration, especially from Muslim countries, because immigrants, in his view, are a menace to the liberal values of Dutch society. Here, then, for the first time, we have a rightwinger denouncing immigrants for their bigotry.
The current success of rightwing scaremongering should at least force us to confront the problems of immigration. Islamism is a serious issue, because it allows confused youths to identify with a worldwide brotherhood, with its own ethics and goals. It gives them something to believe in. And one of the reasons some do so readily is that modern, secular, liberal society has little to offer in its place. The whole point of our disenchanted society is that we have more or less banished faith. This does not cause widespread anguish among the mainstream of young Europeans, but for people who feel trapped between conservative immigrant parents and a bewildering society in which they feel barely accepted, it can.
Liberal pieties about freedom and prosperity don’t get us very far. For freedom is something that aspiring Islamists, who have already tried discos and drugs, often seek to escape. And prosperity throws out no moral or social anchors either. To say that we should all return to an enchanted world of church and hierarchy is not the answer I would seek. And a conscription army which could conceivably help to integrate people from all races and creeds no longer exists. So there is no easy answer, but we should at least recognise that immigration can produce severe cultural tensions. If we don’t, we hand the debate over to the demagogues. And we all know what can happen then.
You cannot make this stuff up. The Victoria Climbie enquiry has been told that the Met was…you guessed it..institutionally racist in its in its handling of the investigation into the death of the child. As usual, the accusation is unaccompanied by either arguments or evidence, but that is not the point. Like rape, the accusation is sufficient if your intention is just to damage the reputation of the accused.
Leroy Logan, chairman of the London Black Police Association, who must have been wondering what the hell he was doing at the enquiry, said that senior officers blamed the death on a black woman police constable without examining the conduct of white colleagues who were no less culpable. He offered no evidence for his claims.
Logan did not discuss the fact that PC Karen Jones was the member of the Child Protection Squad assigned to the Climbie case when the child died, was described as being guilty of “blinding incompetence” during the murder trial and was demonstrably incompetent in her handling of the case. Instead Logan played his race ace early: “She has had to face the double jeopardy of institutional racism and institutional sexism like other black female officers. This may account for the lack of black women progressing up the ranks.”
There you have it folks. The enquiry is actually into the paucity of black female officers not the death of a little black girl at the hands of two black torturers who gruesome abuses were not detected by a black policewoman or a black social worker who’s jobs were to do just that.
The kernel of the racism accusation seems to be that PC Jones is black and apparently it is not PC for detective to investigate the main culprit if the main culprit is black. She was treated disproportionately to other, white, colleagues.
Well well. The case officer in charge came in for more flack than those who dealt with the child a year before. The horror of the case prompted a full public enquiry yet the Met is accused of being institutionally racist for thoroughly investigating this woman.
The final chapter of Kenneth Minogue’s brilliant political primer provides a concise
analysis of our modern political malaise. For those struggling to understand the
rise of political apathy, the slow death of democracy or the rise of extremisms and
those seeking to adapt to the new political world, I strongly recommend getting and
reading the book.
I present, in the meantime, the final chapter which neatly summarises much of what
the little book says:
“Spanish prime minister Jose Maria Aznar considers multiculturalism, for example, to be one of the great threats to Europe. “Multiculturalism is precisely what splits society,” he said. “It is
not living together. It is not integration.” – Guardian.
Anna Kournikova is suing Penthouse over fake topless photos that the magazine published in its June issue. It was clearly a ruse to give its dwindling readership a boost.
Penthouse reported last month that it was in financial trouble blaming the internet for soaking up custom. This is evidence of just how desperate they have become.
..spells bad news for the rest of us (non-members of the Ummah).
The Arts Council are at it again. Not happy distributing lottery money
is flagrantly racist way and trying to impose racial quotas on the
Theatre industry, it has been funding anarchists to the tune of 40K.=20
“Anarchist leaders plotting the May Day demonstrations
across London are organising their protests with the help of an Arts
Council grant. They are planning a timetable for mayhem on an internet
site hosted by a company that has received =A343,000 of taxpayers’ money
in the past two years…”Mayday celebrates an ancient cultural festival
and arguably that is an artistic event.” [said a
Time to shut these idiots down before they start investing our money in
“Controversial black Muslim leader Louis Farrakhan must remain barred
from Britain, the Appeal Court ruled today. ”
I disagree with this judgement. The man has not broken any laws in this
country or the USA and the risk of disorder was deliberately overstated.
This is censorship.
A fine example of why the BNP cannot ever be taken seriously. If this
report is true, then these actions shout very loud. Louder than an
entire harmony of BNP apologists insisting the days of bigotry and
racism are over…
“The British National Party has expelled one of its most influential
members for having a South American girlfriend”
If this is how they treat their own, imagine what the bastards would do
to the rest of us given a modicum of power?