Category Archives: hate crime

Article called “Pale, Male and Stale?” reported to the Police as a Racist, Sexist and Ageist "Hate Crime".

Article called “Pale, Male and Stale?” reported to the Police as a Hate Crime.
I have been calling on people from our side to be more active in using the weapons of Political Correctness against its advocates. I recently came across another opportunity to set an example of what can easily be done.
I am therefore setting out below my correspondence with the National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO) over a blog item entitled “Pale, Male and Stale?” by Lisa Hornung.  
Having got no satisfaction I then reported both the Organisation and the author to the police.
Here is the correspondence with the NCVO and the police:-
4thMay 2018
NCVO
Society Building
8 All Saints Street
London
N1 9RL
                                               
Dear Sir
Re:  Your Blog article Entitled “Pale, Male and Stale?” – complaint
I refer to the blog article appearing on the NCVO’s website found here >>> https://blogs.ncvo.org.uk/2018/04/23/pale-male-and-stale-three-things-i-learned-doing-research-on-diversity-and-volunteering/?_cldee=ZWFo
entitled “Pale, Male and Stale?” 
This is an expression which is both sexist, racist and ageist and insulting, abusive and grossly offensive against older white men.  Lisa Hornung also makes the fundamental error of stating that charities should be run to make “diversity a top priority”.
Anyone involved in running a charity ought to know that “Diversity” is not the primary objective.  The primary objective of a charity is to be run to achieve its charitable purposes.  “Diversity” if it is to be considered to be an objective at all, is certainly no more than a second or third order objective.  Of course what Liza
Hornung means by this comment, which is contrary to the fundamental Laws of Charity here in England, is that charities should, in her Leftist, Internationalist political world view be run in such a way as to conform with her view rather than in accordance with English Law and practice. 
Taken together this article and the relevant tweet on the NCVO’s twitter account which reads as below are anti-White, anti-male, anti-older comments which are grossly offensive, abusive and insulting both within the meaning of Section’s 4A and 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 and contrary to within the meaning of Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003.
“NCVO
Our researcher @ncvolisa looks at the lack of diversity in volunteering, and how we can address it: blogs.ncvo.org.uk/2018/04/23/pal
Pale, male and stale?
1.25am – 30 Apr 2018”
I am hereby making a formal complaint against your organisation generally and Ms Hornung in particular.  I shall consider your response and in the light of that make a decision as to whether to report this matter to the police as a “Hate Speech” Crime.
Yours faithfully
Robin Tilbrook
Director
Letter received from National Council for Voluntary Organisations dated Friday, 11th May 2018
Dear Mr Tilbrook
Re:  Complaint reference 4/05/18/1
Your letter of 4 May was referred to me in line with our complaints policy and I have reviewed your concerned.
The phrase you refer to is used as a shorthand for the issue under discussion, as befits the headline of an article.  It is not used in an abusive or insulting manner.  Indeed, the blog post title is deliberately phrased as a question, and the answer that the blog post sets out is that this ‘civic core’ contribute greatly through their volunteering.
You object to the recommendation in the blog post that organisations wishing to address a lack of diversity may wish to make doing so a top priority.  It is NCVO’s firm and long-held view that organisations are made stronger by involving people of all ages and backgrounds and that seeking to enhance the diversity of volunteers is a positive move for any charity.
You may like to note that the Charity Commission is of a similar view:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/charities-must-do-more-to-promote-diversity-on-their-boards-new-research-shows
In conclusion, I am content that NCVO and our staff have acted entirely appropriately and that the blog post raises no credible grounds for complaint.
If you are not satisfied with this response, our complaints policy gives you the opportunity to have it reviewed.  Should you wish to do so, please contact the complaints coordinator, Tracy Kiernan, at this address.
Regards
Aidan Warner
External Relations Manager
NCVO
And my reply: dated 29th May 2018
Mr Aiden Warner
External Relations Manager
NCVO
Society Building
8 All Saints Street
London  N1 9RL
Dear Sir
Re:  Complaint Reference 4/05/18/1
Thank you for your letter of the 11th May. 
We do not agree with your characterisation of what is clearly a racist, ageist and sexist “Hate Speech” Crime.  In the circumstances we shall be reporting your organisation and Ms Hornung to the police with a view to prosecution. 
On the subject of diversity; what you and the Charity Commission have said is merely a subjective political assertion, as would be the counter assertion that homogeneity gives organisational coherence and strength. 
These are matters of political and philosophical debate and do not negate the laws against “Hate Speech”.
Yours sincerely
Robin Tilbrook
Director
From: Robin Tilbrook
Sent: 30 May 2018 16:10
To: Crime Bureau Essex
Subject: Re: Report of “Hate” Crime/“Hate” incident
Dear Sir
Re:  Report of “Hate” Crime/“Hate” incident
I wish to report both the National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO) and also Ms Lisa Hornung, the author, for her blog item on the NCVO’s website found here >>>  >>>  https://blogs.ncvo.org.uk/2018/04/23/pale-male-and-stale-three-things-i-learned-doing-research-on-diversity-and-volunteering/?_cldee=ZWFo entitled “Pale, Male and Stale?”  Such a remark is anti-white, racist, anti-man, sexist, anti-older people and ageist.  It was also put out on their Facebook and Twitter accounts.
We have made a complaint to NCVO and set out below the contents of our letter which explains my reasoning.  This offending article and the supporting Facebook and Twitter postings were publicised, inter alia, in Essex.
Yours sincerely
R C W Tilbrook
Director
English Lobby
“Protecting English Culture and Values”
A not for profit lobbying organization

From: Crime Bureau Essex
To: Robin Tilbrook
Sent: Thu, 31 May 2018 14:23
Subject: RE: Report of “Hate” Crime/“Hate” incident 
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your email, if you wish to report a hate incident then I’m afraid that you will either need to call into Essex Police on 101 and press the option to report a crime please be aware our phone lines are very busy and there is usually a wait or if you have access to the internet please report it on line on the below link.
https://report.police.uk/
Kind Regards
Essex Police
Crime Bureau

From: Robin Tilbrook
To: Crime.bureau
Sent: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 17:47
Subject: Re: Report of “Hate” Crime/“Hate” incident 
Dear Sir
RE:  Report of “Hate Crime” incident
Thank you for your email. 
I have reported Hate Crimes to you via email before.  What is different about this one?
Yours faithfully
Robin Tilbrook
Director 
English Lobby
“Protecting English Culture and Values”
A not for profit lobbying organization
MR ROBIN TILBROOK                                                   Date: 01/06/2018
Quires Green, Walls Green                                    Crime Ref: 42/76534/18
Ongar
Essex
CM5 0QP
Dear Mr Tilbrook,
I am writing about the crime you reported to us on 30/05/2018.
The details of this offence have been recorded and allocated Crime Reference Number: 42/76534/18.
Crime can be both emotionally and physically traumatic for victims, resulting in a considerable amount of street.  If you feel the need for confidential support or assistance, please contact Victim Support on 0808 1689111.
We are carrying out further investigations and we may be in contact with you if we need to obtain any additional information.
Should you require any further advice or have any additional information regarding this investigation please telephone the police non-emergency number 101.  Please quote your crime reference number in all correspondence.
Yours sincerely
PSE 76567 James Swatton
Essex Police

Code of Practice for Victims of Crime
The code of Practice for Victims of Crime sets out the services to be provided to victims of criminal conduct by criminal justice organisations in England and Wales.
Enhanced entitlements are provided to victims of the most serious crime, persistently targeted victims and vulnerable or intimidated victims.
You can find out more about the Victims code of Practice at:
  • Read the full Victims Code of Practice
www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-code-of-practice-for-victims-of-crime
  • Download the leaflet for ‘Information for Victims of Crime’
www.gov.uk/government/publications/leaflet-for-victims-reporting-a-crime-resource-for-police-forces
  • Making a Victim Personal Statement
www.gov.uk/government/publications/victim-personal-statement
  • More Information on Crime, Justice & the Law
www.gov.uk/browse/justice
www.gov.uk/your-rights-after-crime
  • Get support as a Victim of Crime
www.gov.uk/get-support-as-a-victim-of-crime

"GAMMON" INSULT LOGGED WITH POLICE AS ANTI-ENGLISH RACE ‘HATE’ CRIME

CALLING THE BREXIT SUPPORTING ENGLISH “GAMMON” HAS BEEN SUCCESSFULLY LOGGED WITH THE POLICE AS A HATE INCIDENT
I am setting out below my correspondence with Essex Police over reporting Matt Zorb- Cousins’ slur against those who have supported Brexit, the majority of whom identify themselves as English.  He has deliberately insulted them as “Gammon”.  On reflection it was clear that these are also racial stereotypes in what he says such people look like. 
People who read my blog regularly will know that I have been urging people to use the Left’s “Hate Crime” agenda against them.  So I followed my own advice!
Initially in this case Essex Police were not keen to log the case as a “Hate Crime” and I therefore had to again follow my own advice as to how to make them log it.
I thought that the resulting correspondence is a good read and also a good lesson in how to make sure that “Hate Crime” cases are logged against Left-wing figures.
Here is the correspondence:-
From: Robin Tilbrook
Sent: 18 May 2018 11:46
To: Crime Bureau Essex
Subject: Re: Report of “Hate Crime ” /“Hate incident” “Gammon”
Dear Sir
Re:  Report of “Hate Crime  “  /“Hate incident” – “Gammon”
I wish to report Matt Zarb-Cousin for publically making insulting and offensive remarks against the majority of English who voted for Brexit in a manner which was illegally discriminatory within the meaning of the Equality Act in that he was discriminating against the Nationality, National Identity, National Origin and Ethnicity of the English.
He wrote his “Gammon” article in February in “Huck” which can be found here >>> http://www.huckmagazine.com/perspectives/opinion-perspectives/defence-calling-people-gammon/  
Mr Zarb-Cousin was also on the Jeremy Vine Show on BBC Radio 2 to talk about this at 12.30 on 14th May 2018.  
Taken together his article and tweets and Facebook comments on his accounts are anti-White and anti-English (racist), anti-male (sexist), anti-older (ageist).  His comments are grossly offensive, abusive and insulting both within the meaning of Section’s 4A and 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 and within the meaning of Section 127 of the Communications Act.
   
In the circumstances please confirm that you have logged my report and let me have the crime reference number.  Please confirm what you intend to do to investigate this anti-English “Hate Speech” Crime.
Yours faithfully
Robin Tilbrook
Chairman,
The English Democrats
From: Crime Bureau Essex
To: ‘Robin Tilbrook’  
CC: Crime Bureau Essex
Sent: Fri, 18 May 2018 12:51
Subject: RE: Report of “Hate Crime ” /“Hate incident” “Gammon”
Good afternoon Mr Tilbrook,
Thank you for your email.
In relation to the article on the magazine website, it would be advised if you are offended by this article to complain directly to the magazine as they would have control over the editing and publishing of the article from the writer. The magazine Huck is published and run by the London publishing company TCO London.
Again with the Jeremy Vine show, it would be advised to make a complaint directly to the BBC or to Ofcom in relation to their programming.
Following any complaints, should the publishing houses/companies deem this breaches any criminal offences they should in fact remove the offending articles.
At this time it would not fall within Essex Police to take a report of crime. This has been checked against the home office counting rules and national crime recording standards. If there is a crime that requires recording this would fall to the police force area in which it was published.
Kind regards,
S B
Crime Bureau
Operational Policing Command
Essex Police Headquarters
Ext 488888
Non-Emergency Telephone: 101 (Calling from within Essex) Non-Emergency Telephone: 03003334444 (Calling from outside Essex). When through to an operator, request to be put through to the Crime Bureau.
Email: crime.bureau@essex.pnn.police.uk
Website: www.essex.police.uk
Keep in touch with what is happening in your neighbourhood with Essex Community Messaging. Further details at www.essexcommunitymessaging.org.
From: Robin Tilbrook
Sent: 18 May 2018 13:58
To: Crime Bureau Essex
Subject: Re: Report of “Hate Crime ” /“Hate incident” “Gammon”
Dear Ms Barnes
Thank you for your email.   I wish to make a complaint of these matters as Hate Crimes.  The offending publications did not originate in Essex but were published into Essex and as such are within your jurisdiction. 
Also I would remind you of College of Policing Guidance on the recording “Hate Crime” >>>http://library.college.police.uk/docs/college-of-policing/Hate-Crime-Operational-Guidance.pdf .

Section number 1.2.3. Perception-based recording of hate crime

For recording purposes, the perception of the victim, or any other person (see 1.2.4 Other person), is the defining factor in determining whether an incident is a hate incident, or in recognising the hostility element of a hate crime. The victim does not have to justify or provide evidence of their belief, and police officers or staff should not directly challenge this perception. Evidence of the hostility is not required for an incident or crime to be recorded as a hate crime or hate incident.

Crimes and incidents must be correctly recorded if the police are to meet the objective of reducing under-reporting and improve understanding of the nature of hate crime. The alleged actions of the perpetrator must amount to a crime under normal crime recording rules. If this is the case, the perception of the victim, or any other person, will decide whether the crime is recorded as a hate crime. If the facts do not identify any recordable crime but the victim perceived it to be a hate crime, the circumstances should be recorded as a non-crime hate incident and not a hate crime. 

Yours sincerely

Robin Tilbrook
Chairman,
The English Democrats
From: Crime Bureau Essex
To: ‘Robin Tilbrook’
CC: Crime Bureau Essex
Sent: Sat, 19 May 2018 14:41
Subject: RE: Report of “Hate Crime ” /“Hate incident” “Gammon” 

Mr Tilbrook,
Thank you for your link to the college of policing website, although we do have access to this ourselves.
Under the home office counting rules the location of any offences would in fact fall to where the article was published from and in the case of the radio show where this would have been broadcast from, which is the BBC’s broadcasting house in London.
However, as you have stated you perceive these articles to be offensive and live within Essex, a hate incident has been created on our system and the reference number is EP-20180519-0726. This will be assessed by a hate crime officer for any further action they deem necessary.
Kind regards,
S B
Crime Bureau
Operational Policing Command
Essex Police Headquarters
Ext 488888
Non-Emergency Telephone: 101 (Calling from within Essex) Non-Emergency Telephone: 03003334444 (Calling from outside Essex). When through to an operator, request to be put through to the Crime Bureau.
Email: crime.bureau@essex.pnn.police.uk
Website: www.essex.police.uk
I hope that the above correspondence will encourage everyone else who is annoyed at the “Gammon” slur to complain also to Essex Police and quote the response. 
If you are minded to do so you can email them on Crime.bureau@Essex.pnn.police.uk and quote the police crime reference number EP-20180519-0726, saying that you find what was said to be a “racist, anti-English” and “grossly offensive” remark and that you want to be added as a complainant in the case as you were also offended.  Also ask for Essex Police to keep you informed as to the progress of their investigation.

SENTENCING COUNCIL WANTS TOUGHER SENTENCES AGAINST OPPONENTS OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS

SENTENCING COUNCIL WANTS TOUGHER SENTENCES AGAINST OPPONENTS OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS
I recently spotted that the anonymous Establishment entity calling themselves the “Sentencing Council” was proposing to dramatically increase the sentencing for those who infringe against the British State’s clamp down on free speech.  Here is the English Democrats’ submission on this matter:-
Dear Sir
The English Democrats submission to your consultation is firstly to observe that your Sentencing Council document fails to disclose details of the participating membership of the Council or their relevant interests, such as religion, ethnicity, national identity, racial group, sexuality, etc.  This cannot be right if there is be any transparency or openness in your “consultation”.  You also do not make clear how the members of the Council were appointed and whether there is any transparency in the appointments system.  Again this is another inappropriate lacuna in your document. 
Your consultation starts off with a series of dubious and unsupported assertions about the growth of “Hate Crime”.  So far as we are aware there are in fact no objective figures for the extent of the actual commission of “Hate Crimes”.  Instead what you report is merely the produce of encouraging the reporting of “Hate Crime” and recording all such reports however bogus they may actually be.
What is however known is that the politicisation of policing by the British Political Establishment continues apace in England, which of course is the only part of the “United Kingdom”, which instead of being self-governing, is directly ruled by the British Government.  This establishment is self-interestedly seeking to clamp down on the rising sense of English National Identity.  The results of the 2011 Census showed that 60.4% of the people of England regard their National Identity as “English only” and not “British”.  This was an unwelcome development for the British Political Establishment which has been increasingly directing police resources to clamp down on English free speech.  This is in sharp distinction to the traditional English liberty whose traditional attitude can be encapsulated in playground expression “sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me!” 
The already somewhat un-English and authoritarian legal restrictions on free speech are rendered not only logically incoherent but also nakedly political by the Aggravated Offence Provisions.
In the circumstances, whilst we have nothing to say about the more serious offences involving violence or the threat of violence, we strongly object to your unaccountable body seeking to impose stiffer sentences on those whose exercise of free speech is only treated as a crime if what is said offends Left/Liberal Internationalist/Globalist anti-nationalist/multi-culturalist, anti-English, politically correct opinion.  Conversely when patriots and nationalists are viciously smeared we are told that this must be accepted as legitimate expressions of Free Speech.  The lack of balance and equivalence between these approaches demonstrates that you are seeking to do nothing more than to further politicise the criminal justice system in support of the British Political Establishment rather than on the basis of rationality or dispassionate objectivity. 
Yours sincerely
(Here is a link to the entire document >>>  https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/6.4328_Public_Order_Offences_Guideleines_Consultation_web.pdf 
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/6.4328_Public_Order_Offences_Guideleines_Consultation_web.pdf

What do you think?  Do put in your own submissions because the more people that object the more likely the Establishment is to drop the idea!  Here is their email address to complain to:- info@SentencingCouncil.gov.uk

Report every conceivably relevant instance as an Anti-English “Hate incident” or “Hate Crime”!

I am encouraging people to report every conceivably relevant instance as an Anti-English “Hate incident” or “Hate Crime” in order to flood the Hate Crime statistics and thus make the Police’s statistical results come out contrary to their intended PC narrative!
 

Here is the link to the College of Policing Guidance on the recording “Hate Crime” >>> http://library.college.police.uk/docs/college-of-policing/Hate-Crime-Operational-Guidance.pdf. 

I was directed to this document by the Telegraph article, whose link you can find here entitled:- Hate crime levels spike in the wake of terror attacks as police record more victims
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/17/hate-crime-levels-spike-wake-terror-attacks-police-record-victims/, which I think shows that this Guidance is of the utmost importance.

In particular what is clear from it is that if any of us state that we think we have been subjected to, or just that there has been (it doesn’t have to be against us as individuals), a “Hate Crime” or a “Hate Incident” against English nationalists, or against the English People or against Englishness etc., then the police now have to record it as such. If we can show that the incident is a crime then again they have to record it as a “Hate Crime”. In any case at the least it must be recorded as a “Hate Incident”.

The days of the police being able to say that they have any discretion not to record it are over.

I would suggest that therefore what we should quote the guidance to them and say is that we take the view that this is a hate incident then pursuant to the College of Policing’s “Hate Crime Operational Guidance”.

You can then say that the officer has no discretion and must record this as either a “Hate Incident” or a “Hate Crime”. Then say:- ‘If you do not do so then I will take this matter up as a complaint against you personally.’ 

Then ask for the officer’s badge number if they will not do it and complain to his superior and, if necessary continue with the complaint until fully satisfied!
 
Here is the rule to quote.
 

Section number 1.2.3. Perception-based recording of hate crime


For recording purposes, the perception of the victim, or any other person (see 1.2.4 Other person), is the defining factor in determining whether an incident is a hate incident, or in recognising the hostility element of a hate crime. The victim does not have to justify or provide evidence of their belief, and police officers or staff should not directly challenge this perception. Evidence of the hostility is not required for an incident or crime to be recorded as a hate crime or hate incident.

Crimes and incidents must be correctly recorded if the police are to meet the objective of reducing under-reporting and improve understanding of the nature of hate crime. The alleged actions of the perpetrator must amount to a crime under normal crime recording rules. If this is the case, the perception of the victim, or any other person, will decide whether the crime is recorded as a hate crime. If the facts do not identify any recordable crime but the victim perceived it to be a hate crime, the circumstances should be recorded as a non-crime hate incident and not a hate crime.

Cambridge Professor Nicholas Boyle has been reported to the police for a “Hate Incident”. He called the English “the lager louts of Europe”.

Cambridge Professor Nicholas Boyle has been reported to the police for a “Hate Incident”. He called the English “the lager louts of Europe”.


The English Democrats’ Chairman, Robin Tilbrook has reported Professor Nicholas Boyle of Magdalene College, Cambridge to Essex police for making various insulting and offensive remarks about the English in his article published in the “New European” called “Leave voters are “larger louts of Europe”. 

The problem with the English: England doesn’t want to be just another member of a team – Top Stories – The New European

In the article Professor Boyle wrote:- 

“The referendum vote does not deserve to be respected because, as an outgrowth of English narcissism it is itself disrespectful of others, of our allies, partners and neighbours, friends, and in many cases, even relatives. Less resentful ruffians uprooting the new trees in the park and trashing the new play area, 17 million English, the lager louts of Europe, voted for Brexit in an act of geopolitical vandalism.”

He also wrote:-

“Those who voted Leave were being asked to express an emotion about membership, and the English, but not the Irish or Scots, felt so urgent a need to express it that they threw reason and practicality to the winds”

Professor Boyle also compared the English to Putin’s Russian which “suffers from the same trauma of imperial amputation”.

 
Robin Tilbrook, the Chairman of the English Democrats, said:- “When I read what this Professor had written I realised that he had deliberately, publically insulted the English generally. There is no doubt that he was meaning to be both insulting and offensive to the English nation.

Professor Boyle has therefore been logged by Essex Police as a “suspect” in a “Hate Incident” logged under Hate Crime reference number 42/17384/17.

Robin continued:- “Naturally as an Englishman I am offended by such a tirade by a person who is supposed to be and is paid to be a role model for students. I have therefore reported this to the police as a “Hate Incident”. 

Attacking the English is just as much “Racist” as attacking other racial, ethnic and national groups. 

We English should not put up with such anti-English racist insults and attacks without taking action against the perpetrators”

Robin Tilbrook

Chairman,

The English Democrats

“Fight the Good Fight with all thy might!"


Fight the Good Fight with all thy might!


I am a strong believer in the idea that we owe it to ourselves and to our English Cause to use all appropriate tools and opportunities etc. that are open to us to advance the Cause and also to defend ourselves from opponents.

One of the things that is altogether too obvious is that the police have come down hard on Right-wing, nationalistic, patriotic protesters even when they are being basically law-abiding. This is in the context to their treatment of Left-wing, anti-racist, anti-FA, Hope not Hate types and other multi-culturalist campaigners. My suspicion has been that not only is there a degree of bias, as people have often maintained, but also there has been insufficient action on our side to use all available opportunities to counter-attack or to get in a pre-emptive attack on opponents.

One example is the Government’s new “Prevent” strategy, which has been sold to the public as being part of an anti-terrorism campaign. Most people, who only skim read news stories and do not pay close attention to what is going on, may still think “Prevent” is focussed solely on Islamist terrorists and troublemakers.

Let me tell you now unequivocally that it isn’t! 

You don’t need to be an English nationalist for this to apply to you. It will be enough for you to be a traditional Conservative!

So let’s see whether, as far as the Government is concerned, YOU are an “EXTREMIST”?

The Government has been busy developing a wholly partisan definition of “Britishness” and/of “British values”.
 

Those who do not read these things carefully, may think that their values because they are traditional and that they are historically British that they would qualify as part of “Britishness”. 

Let me tell you now – no they don’t necessarily!

Here is the Government definition of “Britishness” and of “British” values. They only apply in England so read it carefully!

I have highlighted the bit that you need to pay particular attention in bold and underlined.

“The Department for (English only) Education has … published guidance on promoting British values in schools to ensure young people leave school …

The guidance aims to help both independent and state-maintained schools understand their responsibilities in this area. All have a duty to ‘actively promote’ the fundamental British values of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, and mutual respect and tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs. These values were first set out by the government in the ‘Prevent’ strategy in 2011.

Until now schools have been required to ‘respect’ these values, but as a result of changes brought in earlier in the year all schools must now have a clear strategy for embedding these values and show how their work with pupils has been effective in doing so. In a letter to the Education Select Committee in March, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Schools Lord Nash explained the changes were designed to “tighten up the standards on pupil welfare to improve safeguarding, and the standards on spiritual, moral, social and cultural development of pupils to strengthen the barriers to extremism”.

Ofsted and the independent inspectorates now take the work of schools in this area into account during inspections.

Publishing the guidance today, Lord Nash said:

A key part of our plan for education is to ensure children become valuable and fully rounded members of society who treat others with respect and tolerance, regardless of background.

We want every school to promote the basic British values of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, and mutual respect and tolerance for those of different faiths and beliefs.

This ensures young people understand the importance of respect and leave school fully prepared for life in modern Britain.

Examples of the understanding and knowledge pupils are expected to learn include:
an understanding of how citizens can influence decision-making through the democratic process
an understanding that the freedom to hold other faiths and beliefs is protected in law
an acceptance that people having different faiths or beliefs to oneself (or having none) should be accepted and tolerated, and should not be the cause of prejudicial or discriminatory behaviour
an understanding of the importance of identifying and combatting discrimination

Examples of actions schools can take to promote British values are to:
include in suitable parts of the curriculum – as appropriate for the age of pupils – material on the strengths, advantages and disadvantages of democracy, and how democracy and the law works in Britain, in contrast to other forms of government in other countries
ensure all pupils within the school have a voice that is listened to, and demonstrate how democracy works by actively promoting democratic processes such as a school council whose members are voted for by the pupils
use opportunities such as general or local elections to hold mock elections to promote fundamental British values and provide pupils with the opportunity to learn how to argue and defend points of view
consider the role of extra-curricular activity, including any run directly by pupils, in promoting fundamental British values

The government today also published its interim response to a consultation of the revised Independent Schools Standards (ISS). The revised standards cover independent schools, academies and free schools, ensuring they – along with local authority-maintained schools – must promote British values.”

(Here is the link to the source >>> https://www.gov.uk/government/news/guidance-on-promoting-british-values-in-schools-published

If you are not absolutely certain that I have got this right, check it out on the link.

On the other hand if you have read the definitions carefully, ask yourself if you agree with EVERY aspect of that definition being applied only in England? If you don’t then you are what the Government is trying to redefine as an “Extremist”.
 
What about if, for example, you are a serious and practising Christian and you believe Jesus’ statement in the Gospel of St John, Chapter 14, Verse 6:- “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me”?  If so then you are an “Extremist” and your values are not the British Government’s “British values”!

Since these values are the litmus test, here in England, as to whether or not you are an “Extremist” that means that so far as the system is concerned you are an “Extremist” and the “Prevent” strategy is there to disrupt you, your life and your associations.

You might ask how does all this relate to what I said in the beginning, that we are not doing enough to use what is available to us? Well the point is that it is not only us who would not necessarily support every last bit of the Government’s definition of multi-culti “Britishness”, but also the Left don’t support it either.

There is a case that I have recently been advising in which is relevant.

As part of the case we reported a Leftist troublemaker to the police. He was visited by the relevant police Prevent Team and has now been put on the Prevent “Watch List” as an Extremist!

What that means is that if that Leftist now takes part in any activity in the future which is hostile to, for example, English nationalists, then the police are far more likely to crackdown on him than they would have been hitherto.

From now on he will be on the “Watch List” and will be flagged up as somebody whose activities ought to be disrupted.

It is the same with reporting anti-English so called “Hate Crimes”. These always ought to be reported. If a police officer shows any reluctance to accept it as a “hate crime” then a complaint should be made against the officer concerned. The complaint should be taken as far as it can up the Police Forces’ complaints system so that it gets into the records that a lot of the “hate crime” is perpetrated against the English rather than by them.

Equally no opportunity should be lost to insist that you are “English” on ethnic monitoring forms rather than permitting yourself to be put down as “British” which is a legally invalid category and therefore waives your rights and your community’s rights under the Equality Act.

I could of course give many other examples of where we need to make sure that we do pull our weight, but I am sure you get the point! But don’t be put off by any official discouragement! 

Remember the parable of the unjust Judge in the Gospel of St Luke, Chapter 18, Verse 6:-  
“There was in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man: And there was a widow in that city; and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary. And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not God, nor regard man; Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me. And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith.”

SPECIAL RIGHTS for Muslims?

I have sometimes been asked if Muslims have actually asked for special legal treatment.  The Article below is an example of an influential Muslim doing so but it is quite subtle.
 
The article is from the “Huffington Post” an online news agency well known in America for its Left/Liberal bias but in the ‘UK’ its political editor is the BBC’s favourite Leftist/Islamist, Mehdi Hasan, who seems here to be giving his views on us infidels.  Click here >>> Mehdi Hasan – Non Muslims live like animals – YouTube and here he is talking about the Shiite Islamic equivalent of Judas in which he seems to demonise gays >>> ?MehdiHasanYazidHomoKaffir – YouTube.  If the “hate crime” law was equally applied I would have expected Mr Hasan to have been at least considered for prosecution over these comments, wouldn’t you?

It should therefore not be surprising that this Leftist online news outlet edited by an Islamist is vocal in its support of the ‘UK’s’ “Islamic Community”(sic!).

As journalists often do, Mehdi weaves into his story a source that he approves of  “Tell Mama” but which has been exposed as being just as unreliable a source as he is himself! For revelations about “Tell Mama” and its leader who is quoted so approvingly by Mehdi Hassan, click here >>>The truth about the ‘wave of attacks on Muslims’ after Woolwich murder – Telegraph

The thrust of Mehdi’s article is that “Hate Crime” against Muslims should be punished with especially severe criminal sanctions.

Actually such “hate crime” already is treated more severely than anyone applying ordinary common sense, or indeed ordinary legal principles, would think appropriate if, but only if, it is committed by English people against any other ethnic minority group or individual.  Also consider the BBC’s reaction to criticism over a more significant, deliberate and calculated blasphemy against Jesus Christ >>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7128552.stm.

It should also be borne in mind that “hate crime” can often mean merely a rude remark rather than any sort of violent attack.

In my view the old playground adage of “sticks and stone may break my bones but words will never hurt me!” should be the start point for any contemplated prosecution (or conviction) for, often trivial, rudeness.

However, if that rudeness spills over into physical aggression or threats of violence, then of course I would support punishment but focussed only on what has actually happened not as a result of a sort of witch trial, otherwise it is the State itself which becomes the instrument of victimisation!  (No doubt to the pleasure of people like Mehdi Hasan)!

What do you think? (Note the startling, but no doubt deliberate, confusion of a building with people and the extent of the group allegedly “targeted” in “When you target a mosque, you are targeting the whole community.”)

Here is the “Huffington Post” Article:-

Hate Crimes Against Muslims Soar After Woolwich Murder Of Lee Rigby

Hate crimes against Muslims have soared in 2013, new figures have shown. Hundreds of anti-Muslim offences have been carried out across the country in 2013, with Britain’s biggest force, the Metropolitan police, recording 500 Islamophobic crimes alone.

Many forces reported a surge in the number of anti-Muslim hate crimes following the murder of soldier Lee Rigby by two Islamic extremists in Woolwich, south-east London. And it is feared the figures could be much higher after nearly half of the 43 forces in England and Wales did not reveal how many hate crimes had targeted Muslims – with some forces admitting they do not always record the faith of a religious hate crime victim.

Freedom of Information requests were sent by the Press Association to every police force in England and Wales. Of the 43 forces, 24 provided figures on the number of anti-Muslim crimes and incidents recorded. Tell Mama, a group which monitors anti-Muslim incidents, said it had dealt with some 840 cases since April – with the number expected to rise to more than 1,000 by the end of March.

This compared with 582 anti-Muslim cases it dealt with from March 2012 to March 2013. Fiyaz Mujhal, director of Faith Matters, which runs the Tell Mama project, said reaction to the murder of Fusilier Rigby had caused the number of Islamophobic crimes to “significantly jump”. He added: “The far right groups, particularly the EDL (English Defence League) perniciously use the internet and social media to promote vast amounts of online hate.”

Mujhal said tougher sentencing was needed to tackle Islamophobic crime and branded guidelines by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to monitor social media as “not fit for purpose”. He said: “They raised the bar of prosecution significantly. Now unless there is a direct threat to somebody on Twitter or Facebook, the CPS will not prosecute. The CPS is just plainly out of sync with reality.

“We also need more robust sentencing. In one case, a pig’s head was left outside a mosque and the perpetrator came away with a community sentence. When you target a mosque, you are targeting the whole community.”

Tell Mama has called for police forces to introduce a system which improves monitoring of Islamophobic crimes, after some forces admitted officers do not always record the faith of a religious hate crime victim.
“There are three problems we come across,” Mujhal said. “Firstly, there is a lack of understanding of the language of Islamophobia thrown at victims in any incidents. Secondly, there is very little training on how to ask relevant questions to pull out anti-Muslim cases. Thirdly, recording processes are not in line with each other. One force will allow an officer to flag an incident as anti-Muslim, another force will flag it as religious hate crime. There is no uniformity. There must be guidelines for all forces so we can know the level of the problem.”

The Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) has previously said 71 incidents were reported to its national community tension team (NCTT) over five days after Fusilier Rigby was murdered on May 22. Superintendent Paul Giannasi, Acpo’s spokesman on hate crime, said: “The police service is committed to reducing the harm caused by hate crime and it is vital that we encourage more victims who suffer crimes to report them to the police or through third party reporting facilities such as Tell Mama.

“Acpo has played a key role in improving reporting mechanisms, including through the development of our True Vision website (www.report-it.org.uk). This provides information to victims and allows people to report online. We would obviously want overall crime levels to reduce and to see fewer victims, but we welcome increases in reported hate crime, as long as they are a sign of increased confidence of victims to report. We are working with local police forces, to help improve the way we respond to hate crime and to provide robust and transparent hate crime data.”

A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: “These are despicable crimes that devastate lives and communities. The courts already hand out tougher punishments where race or religion are found to be aggravating factors. The number of people receiving a custodial sentence for these appalling crimes is higher than ever before.”

A CPS spokeswoman said: “Online communication can be offensive, shocking or in bad taste. However, as set out in CPS guidelines on prosecuting cases involving communications sent via social media, content has to be more than simply offensive to be contrary to the criminal law. In order to preserve the right to free speech the threshold for prosecution must be high and only communications that are grossly offensive, indecent, obscene or false are prohibited by the legislation.”

(Here is the link to the original article >>>Hate Crimes Against Muslims Soar After Woolwich Murder Of Lee Rigby)