Racism Cuts Both Ways. A response to Searchlight

After the British National Party released its hard hitting booklet Racism Cuts Both Ways that can be read in PDF format by following this link, Seachlight, the state funded organisation that is currently the subject of a Police Investigation, responded with an attack in the "establishment" controlled media, calling into doubt the validity of some of the information contained within the booklet.

As a result of their claims, Nemesis, a writer on the Green Arrow site and one of our most thorough and diligent researchers took Searchlights document apart with a fine toothcombe and as released the truth in the following article.

This document was received in Word format and I may well have to edit and reformat it during the course of the day.

AN ANALYSIS OF SEARCHLIGHT’S RESPONSE TO THE BOOKLET

RACISM CUTS BOTH WAYS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Offence

In November 2008 the campaign Racism Cuts Both Ways was not received very well by some elements of our society. The booklet highlighted the actual level of Racism shown towards the British people exposing the Government controlled media silence on the matter. The media and its controlling bodies reacted with such irrational venom that it became apparent to wider sections of the public who the baddies really were. The exposure caused uproar amongst their ranks culminating in a pathetic malice motivated release of the OBSOLETE B.N.P. membership list. The move proved counter- productive with B.N.P. credibility and membership numbers increasing. The public came to see the B.N.P. for what it was … the New Party of the People. The counter- productive initial attack upon the B.N.P. in the form of the release of the membership list was followed up by another tantrum style attack pertaining to the accuracy of the information in the booklet Racism Cuts Both Ways. This attack has been carried out by Searchlight and can be found in their December 2008 edition. It is this attack about which this report is compiled.

1.2 The Offender and Motive

The Searchlight organisation is a political tool of the current Plutocratic controlled totalitarian Government operating under the guise of philanthropy. The primary aim of Searchlight appears to be in the delivery of misinformation/ lies to the public to impede the democratic growth of the B.N.P. The impediment is necessary to give the Government bodies enough time to infiltrate the B.N.P. with the intention of taking over the Party from within.

1.3 Annulment of the Offender and Puppeteers’ Powers

This however can be thwarted by the B.N.P. mandate of the introduction of political REFERENDA on all MAJOR issues. This will take away the power of the few over the many. This issue must be foremost in B.N.P. issues or the Party will eventually fall under the control of those it was established to resist.

1.4 The Offended and Motive

The offended party is the British National Party. The B.N.P. has been unfairly and probably illegally impugned by a group that represent the political British controlling bodies. The B.N.P. will refute or uphold the allegations in the wake of an analysis of the available information and data presented by Searchlight.

1.5 The Aim of the Report

The report’s objective is to FAIRLY examine the accusations laid down by Searchlight in relation to the legality, reliability and accuracy of the information contained in the B.N.P. report Racism Cuts Both Ways. The report presented by Searchlight has been cursorily read and appears to be extremely bias, inaccurate and intentionally deceptive. The work will be examined in depth with the findings concluded and presented in this work.

2.0 ANALYSIS

2.1 The Twelve Cases Selected by Searchlight

In the Searchlight analysis of the booklet Racism Cuts Both Ways the organisation has selected 12 cases to examine out of what it claims are 167. “The BNP claims that 167 white people have been the victims of racist murder over the past years but its evidence is totally inaccurate” (http://www.racismcutsbothways.org.uk/ ). Searchlight has claimed that the selected 12 cases were not racially motivated (http://www.racismcutsbothways.org.uk/BNP-exploits-the-victims.php). However, if this allegation was correct at best it would ONLY account for 7.2% of the total leaving 92.8% of the alleged 167 cases accepted without question.

The fact is that in the booklet Racism Cuts Both Ways the 142 (total 178 no 167) cases identified refer only to blacks killing whites. “However, out of the total of 178 killings, 142 saw white victims slain by BME assailants, while 36 involved the liberal stereotype white/ racist coloured victim” (Racism Cuts Both Ways, p9). The information source of Searchlight’s for the figure of 167 is an enigma. According to Searchlight “To back up his claim the BNP has released the names of 167 people who it alleges are the victims of anti-white racism” (http://www.searchlightmagazine.com/index.php?link=template&story=255). The B.N.P. does not claim that the 142 murders were racially motivated merely that they were BME assailant victims. Additionally, the B.N.P. could not have referred to 167 in the booklet, as this number does not fit to any of the figures given, see the booklet. In addition the B.N.P. reveal the figures involving the murders of coloured peoples by whites that in reverse Searchlight fails to do highlighting the bias with which they write.

2.2 Analysis of the twelve cases

2.2.1 Sharon Beshenivsky

The first case examined by Searchlight is the case of P.C. Sharon Beshenivsky 38 a mother of five. She was shot dead by a gunshot wound to the chest while attending a call to an armed robbery in 2004. “Eyewitnesses said an Asian man and two black men armed with guns fired shots as they escaped with cash from the premises in Morley” (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bradford/4451508.stm ). So in this scenario we have three coloured armed men confronted by two unarmed white female police officers who were both shot in the upper body. In this case there appears to have been no need to shoot the female police officers in order to escape. The three men would have been quite capable of overpowering two virtually unarmed female police officers without resorting to shooting them. In many cases where an armed person has been cornered the person has used the least force to escape such as shooting in the leg or other non-fatal spot if use of the weapon has been considered necessary. The two officers could have been incapacitated without resorting to measures that seriously risked their lives such as upper body gunshots. The question is would the perpetrators have responded differently if coloured officers had confronted them? There was certainly unnecessary harm inflicted in the crime but what had motivated this? Was this a result of Racism? Searchlight claims there was no evidence to suggest a racist motive. In addition there certainly does not appear to be any evidence to suggest it was not a racially motivated act. The fact remains that a white unarmed FEMALE police officer was shot dead by an armed coloured trio in circumstances where the action far exceeded the force needed to escape. The motive behind the killing would have to be considered malicious in accordance with the available evidence. People are not deliberately shot to death with love … it is usually done with hatred or indifference. Hatred or indifference shown towards another race is a trait of Racism and is found in this case where members of one race have shot dead a member of another. What can be more racist than this?

2.2.2 Allen Chappelow

“Hampstead millionaire Allan Chappelow was killed in his own home some time in May or June 2006. Wang Yam, 46, was charged with Chappelow's murder but the jury failed to return a verdict. His is currently being retried but has so far not been convicted. This has not stopped the BNP from claiming that Chappelow was the victim of a racist murder” (http://www.racismcutsbothways.org.uk/BNP-exploits-the-victims.php). This is the TRUTH of Searchlight. Let us look at the TRUTH of the Times newspaper. “A leading Chinese dissident has been convicted of murdering a reclusive millionaire author as part of a scheme to plunder his wealth. Wang Yam battered Allan Chappelow to death in his £4.1 million villa in Hampstead, North London, in order to steal his identity. Most of the Old Bailey trial was held in secret with the press and public excluded — thought to be the first murder trial to have been held in secret because of national security” (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article5530970.ece ). Searchlight is really uninformed or deliberately telling us porkies. And why was the trial held in secret with the press and public excluded because of national security … it would not have been because it was a blatent racial killing would it? I think we can safely assume what the threat to national security was … the truth. A truth that would be beneficial to the B.N.P. and the British public … the public have the right to know the TRUTH. In this incidence we have the murder of a British person by a Chinese man who according to the information provided by the Times wanted not just the victims possessions but also his identity. The man has been convicted contrary to the false claim of Searchlight. Wang Yam “batterred Allen Chapelow to death”. The act in itself would involve hatred or indifference which are traits of Racism when carried out against people of different ethnic basckgrounds which is found in this case.

2.2.3 Vincent Swift

“Vincent Swift died after a violent racist incident” “Even though race proved to be a factor in the death, it must be emphasised that Swift initiated the racial clash.” (Searchlight, http://www.racismcutsbothways.org.uk/BNP-exploits-the-victims.php). Oops. How can they argue this one and hope to get away with it? Well, because Mr Swift despite being the victim was accused of starting it. Even though the perpetrators vacated the scene and returned later armed it was of course still Mr Swift’s fault Searchlight would have us believe. The blaming of the victim is appearing to become common place in these twelve cases. Oh, and you will also notice that Mr Swift despite being the victim is referred to as Swift with no Mr as in the cases of most of the other eleven cases; this is the HATEFUL way the perpetrator is usually referred to not the victim … in these cases the HATE is being shown towards the victims which is a trait of Racism.. So according to Searchlight it appears to be quite acceptable to kill someone if they are deemed the provocateur. In this case the convicted perpetrators are Kosovans … ‘allegedly’ provoked Eastern Europeans … the ones that are ‘ALLEGEDLY’ so good for our economy; that is of course I take it, when they are not going around murdering us. The racist element here has been conceded by Searchlight concluding this case as racist.

2.2.4 Nick Padget

Searchlight admits Mr. Padget was a white gentleman killed by a black doorman Mr Griffith while he was being ejected from an O’neil’s bar. The doorman was charged with manslaughter but later acquitted according to Searchlight. Searchlight also maintains that Mr Padget “was drinking heavily with friends and was asked to leave an O'Neills pub after upsetting other customers. On leaving the pub Padget struck the doorman but later died after receiving a single blow in return.” How convenient and legal for the doorman. A doorman would have known that drunken people are just that ‘drunk’ and usually a pushover for a physically formidable doorman. Any heavy blow dealt by a doorman to a drunken customer is a blow that risks killing the person as seen in this case. The doorman ‘probably’ overstepped the mark by striking Mr Padget instead of physically restraining him resulting in his death. The bias shown towards Mr Padget by Searchlight is evident in referring to him as Padget without the Mr .… after all Mr Padget was the victim. In the case of Nick Padget we have a white person killed by a black person who appears to have used force well beyond what was necessary in the circumstances. We ask the question would the doorman have reacted in the same way towards a person of his own ethnic background? Would he have struck with such force that would prove fatal? If the answer is ‘probably’ no then this is a black on white killing with an element of Racism.

2.2.5 Ronnie Kettridge

“Ronnie Kettridge died when he was attacked and thrown from his car after it was carjacked. Jamie Lee Osbourne was later found guilty of murder but given that he had a white girlfriend, who was involved in the attack, it can hardly be described as a racist murder” (Searchlight, http://www.racismcutsbothways.org.uk/BNP-exploits-the-victims.php). How did they work this out? So if a coloured man has a white girlfriend he cannot be racist according to Searchlight. In this context Arab slave masters who woo foreign women with the intent to racially abuse them would not be racist according to Searchlight logic. It seems that Searchlight when suitable also thinks that Racism is defined in accordance only with the colour of the perpetrator. Jamie Lee Osbourne had the strength to eject Mr Kettridge from his own vehicle while on the move so was obviously a lot stronger. In these circumstances Mr Kettridge was of minimal physical threat to J. L. Osbourne. The action taken by the carjacker well exceeded what was necessary to achieve his aims. J. L. Osbourne appears to have acted unnecessarily and maliciously displaying traits of Racism. The perpetrator has shown hatred or indifference in his actions towards Mr Ketteridge who is of a different ethnic background constituting Racism.

2.2.6 Stuart Watt

We look at the murder of 24 year old Briton Stuart Watt next. “Stuart Watt was murdered during a night out in Blackpool in September 2004, as he was celebrating after being given the all-clear for cancer. Watt, 24, was killed outside the Flares nightclub. Three days later head doorman Sajad Hussein Ali was arrested and charged with the murder” (http://www.racismcutsbothways.org.uk/BNP-exploits-the-victims.php). Despite being charged there appears to be no record of the case or the conclusion. All crimes of this magnitude, where there is no Government intervention, receive media coverage. The media blackout serves only to arouse suspicion of a government controlled covered up racially motivated murder. Again Mr Watt is referred to by Searchlight as Watt which is the treatment usually reserved for the perpetrator. An Asian was charged with Mr Watt’s murder with no further obtainable information on the subject. The matter came to rest with an Asian in the frame. The media blackout suggests a strong possibility of a racially motivated cover up.

2.2.7 David Sheehan

“David Sheehan was killed in awful circumstances in January 2003. He was tortured and had his throat slashed before being left to die in his house. The BNP website notes that "two black males had been arrested in connection with the offence," but offers no more information about the case. What it failed to mention was that these two men were released a short time later without charge and no-one has ever been convicted of the murder” (http://www.racismcutsbothways.org.uk/BNP-exploits-the-victims.php). The fact remains that the ONLY suspects were two black men. Whether or not the two men arrested were the actual perpetrators or not the evidence that the police had indicates that they were looking for black offenders. The extreme violence and cruelty involved in the murder suggests an intense hatred that is a key factor in Racism. The facts in this case reveal that the evidence points towards black offenders and the level of irrational violence a trait of Racism.

2.2.8 Aaron Chapman

“According to the B.N.P., Aaron Chapman was a “young prison officer” who was “stabbed through his heart and liver outside his home” in what it claims was a racist attack. The truth is quite different. Not only was his killer, Mark Dorling, white, but Chapman had been suspended from work at the time for moonlighting as a doorman and for becoming too friendly with some of the prisoners. The court also heard how he was believed to have been involved in drug dealing. This murder appears to have been connected to a dispute among criminals and had no racial motive” (http://www.racismcutsbothways.org.uk/BNP-exploits-the-victims.php). If there was no racial motive why mention it? Here we again find Searchlight attacking the victim. He was moonlighting as a doorman; he was too friendly … a pathetic justifiably unsubstantiated attempt at character assassination. So I suppose it is O.K. to kill prison officers because they sometimes have to supplement their wages and are nice to people according to Searchlight mentality. Notice the absence of the Mr again referring to the victim as Chapman? The prison officer that was murdered has also been relegated to the ranks of a criminal drug pusher without any evidence to substantiate this. The prison officer through his occupation was part of the criminal world … he was locking offenders up … of course he rubbed shoulders with offenders and knew some of them well. The evidence suggests he was a nice guy … was this perceived as his crime by Searchlight? Perhaps if he had been a psychotically unstable cruel craven sycophant Searchlight would have endeavoured to employ him … in this mode he could have fitted snugly in amongst their ranks without any differentiation. What Searchlight has failed to mention is that even though a white man was convicted a black man had also been arrested. The white man appears to have taken the rap. Take the sentence, ”This murder appears to have been connected to a dispute among criminals and had no racial motive” to get some idea of the bias. Searchlight claims,“ This murder “appears” in the first part of the sentence. The second part highlights the bias where the uncertainty of the first part mutates into the definite with “had no racial motive” despite having no more evidence upon which the first part of the sentence was made. With no more evidence to support their claim than there is to support a dispute among criminals Searchlight maintains there was no racial motive. How can they be so sure if there is no evidence? Also they quote “stabbed through the heart and liver outside his house” yet do not quote the rest of the sentence “in what it claims was a racist attack”. Why is there no quote here? The bias and deceit of Searchlight attempts to suggest the victim was the transgressor and the incident a non- racist attack. Even though Searchlight would have you believe there was no different adverse cultural involvement in this case the fact remains that there was. Searchlight has failed to reveal that the initial co- defendant of Mark Dorling was black which introduces the probability of Racism into the equation.

2.2.9 David Driscoll

“David Driscoll was murdered in a flat in South Oxhey, near Watford in November 2006, in what appears to have been a plot to steal cocaine. Driscoll, 31, had booked an escort the previous evening and paid for her services in cocaine rather than cash. A court heard that his killer had gone to his flat to search for the drugs” “There was no racial motive mentioned in any of the news reports” (http://www.racismcutsbothways.org.uk/BNP-exploits-the-victims.php). If there was no racial motive why mention what was not mentioned? Searchlight is again treating the victim as the transgressor by referring to Mr Driscoll as Driscoll minus the Mr. and referring to him as a druggie. It appears to now be standard practice for a media blackout on reporting racially motivated murders. In view of this you would not expect to find such revelation in news reports. The recent SECRET trial of Wang Yam for the murder of Allen Chappelow highlights the lengths the Government controlling bodies will resort in order to suppress the TRUTH. The four accused in the David Driscoll trial, Raymond Agbugba- Cansie, Thaimloll Conteh, Nathan Bruce and Leon Walsh do not appear to be of white British ancestry. The convicted Nathan Bruce appears to have preyed upon Mr Driscoll with the primary aim of acquiring drugs according to Searchlight. However, the treatment he meted out to Mr Driscoll in the process of achieving his aim was excessive and unnecessary to say the least. Any hatred or indifference shown towards someone of alternative race is a trait of Racism. Mr Bruce showed this to Mr Driscoll during what would have been an unnecessary murder if the primary aim had been the acquisition of drugs bringing the case under the category of Racism.

2.2.10 Jolen Colpus

Jolen Colpus is one of the few murder victims, out of the twelve cases selected by Searchlight, to have been referred to in the appropriate way for a victim. She was either referred to by her Christian name or full name but there was not that much written by them on the case … perhaps the writers had to get home early to watch the next episode of the Grimes Brothers for their future inspiration. However, she has been identified as a drug pusher by Searchlight despite providing no evidence to substantiate their claim. The killing of Jolen according to Searchlight was over a drugs transaction disagreement with Kieron Simei who was identified as the killer and a customer. Again there is no evidence to substantiate he was a customer which would have put Jolen in the frame as a drugs pusher. The information provided by Searchlight suggests that Jolen was murdered over the triviality of a two- penny drugs transaction. A person of a different ethnic background carried out the killing of Jolene. The action involved in the taking of Jolen’s life was not motivated by love and was not a voluntary suicide or mercy killing. The only type left is murder motivated by hatred or indifference. Any murder carried out in this category by members of opposing ethnicity comes under the category of Racism.

2.2.11 Mark Wetherall

The murder of Mark Wetherall took place in March 2007. In the brief write up on Mr Wetherall by Searchlight he is referred to in the derogatory sense with the Mr absent. This derogatory referral to the victims has been seen throughout the work of Searchlight. Searchlight claims that the assailants were white “according to the photos of the three on the BBC website, none were black!” “According”, is Searchlight having doubts here about the reliability of the Government controlled information source the B.B.C.? Or are they aware of a con for which they want to shed all responsibility? Whether we are looking at a dubious information source, or a con it should be noted that Racism is not just defined by the colour of the skin … the definition set by Searchlight. Whether the murderers were black or not, Racism depends upon the killers’ ethnic backgrounds and the intent and motivation involved in the crime. If the killers were of different ethnic origin to Mr Wetherall and the killing motivated by malice then the murder comes under the category of Racism.

2.2.12 Keith and Mathew Cowell

The case of Keith and Mathew Cowell in which they were murdered in an attack upon their family home we again see Searchlight’s condemnation of the victims. Again we see the unjust castigation of the victim in the omission of Mr when using the surnames overtly exposing the bias. Searchlight has adopted the Billericay Echo opinion on what occurred; “According to the Billericay Echo the men were killed with a machine gun after a botched drug deal. Once again there was no racial motive to the attack”. Again if there was no racial motive why mention this? The ranting of Searchlight continues with the inclusion of the third person killed Tony Dulieu. “Both Dulieu and Keith Cowell were known thugs and drug dealers”. The information provided by Searchlight and the Billericay Echo has painted a picture where three drug dealing thugs have been murdered in a drugs deal that has collapsed. The killers also attempted to murder two female relatives one of whom was shielding a three year old girl from the crazed Thakrar assailants. They failed in their attempts to murder the two women after running out of ammunition for their guns resorting to knives. … amazingly the two women managed to hold their own against them. The Daily Telegraph also adopted the view that the case revolved around a drug deal; “Miran Thakrar, 24, of no fixed abode, was sentenced to a minimum of 42 years for killing Keith Cowell, 52, his son, Matthew Cowell, 17, and friend, Tony Dulieu, 33, with a Mac-10 weapon during a £30,000 cocaine deal last August” (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2544044/Triple-killers-turned-to-knives-when-submachine-gun-bullets-ran-out.html). The Government controlled Searchlight and these two Government controlled newspapers want us to believe that this attack upon a family where even the dog was killed was the result of a drug deal turning sour. Let us examine the opinion of a man who is highly experienced in these matters; “Detective Chief Inspector Michael Hanlon, senior investigating officer in the case, said: "In my career I had never ever experienced any crime like this when three people had been killed and in cold blood and with nothing to actually build upon on why it had taken place. It was completely disproportionate to a drug deal that had gone wrong”. According to this experienced high ranking police officer who dealt with the case there was no evidence to suggest that any drug dealing had taken place. He goes on to say that the evidence actually pointed against a drug deal having taken place. Also, Mr Jennings who was actually there stated; “On the night of the murders, two men burst into the house brandishing automatic weapons and ordered the family to get on the floor”. Surely this is not the usual way drug deals commence? The evidence submitted by these two gentleman contradicts the accusations made by the Government controlled and censored bodies. One person highly acclaimed in this field of work who was involved in the case and the other a person actually at the scene. Additionally, surely someone would have noticed the machine guns they were carrying if they had been invited into the house. The evidence here suggests that the murders were not the result of a drug deal fiasco. However, the mental and physical condition of the assailants would suggest some form of drug intake by the perpertrators before making the attack. We are informed by the Government controlled bodies that the incident occurred during a disputed drug related transaction and that there was no racial motive to the attack. The information suggests there was no drug deal. The exposure of the misinformation supplied by the Government controlled bodies on this subject invalidates the reliability and accuracy of any information further supplied by them. If these people told you their name you would have to double check. The claim there was no racial motive to the attack by these people is no more valid than their previous invalidated statements. The drug deal association appears to be a red herring introduced to draw attention from the real issue. The irrational malice involved in the attacks indicates an intense hatred. Intense hatred is a trait of Racism. The aim of the attack appears to have been to inflict physical harm not to acquire drugs or money. The delivery of misinformation on the motive for the attack only serves to suggest that any subsequent statement made by these people in relation to Racism could also be the product of liars. The evidence suggests there was no drug deal; that the incident was a preconceived maliciously motivated attack upon a family and that the Plutocracy controlled duly elected attempted to cover up of the truth. A maliciously motivated attack upon people of another race is a trait of Racism. This trait is found in this case bringing it unto the category of Racism.

3.0 FINDINGS

3.1 Searchlight’s Attack Upon the Victims

In the findings we discover that in the twelve cases studied the majority of the murder victims have been treated with total disrespect by Searchlight. The victims appear to have been portrayed as the perpetrators and undergone perpetual character assassination throughout Searchlight’s biased analysis of the cases. In the case of Vincent Swift we find Mr Swift the murder victim portrayed as the culprit by Searchlight. The murder victim Aaron Chapman and Keith and Mathew Cowell have all been portrayed as the baddies without a shred of evidence forwarded to support these accusations. The five murder victims prison officer Aaron Chapman, David Driscoll, Jolen Colbus and Keith and Mathew Cowell have all been defamatorily accused of involvement in the reprehensible practice of drug trafficking. There appears to be no evidence to support these groundless and unjustifiable allegations. Only four of the victims, P.C. Sharon Beshenivsky, David Sheehan, Jolen Colbus and Ronnie Ketteridge were referred to compassionately without referring to them by surname only. Despite some compassion shown in this area Jolen Colbus was unjustifiably one of the five accused of drug trafficking. The remaining nine murder victims have been referred to in a derogatory fashion with omission of their Mr titles throughout the examination of the cases. There was strong insinuation that these nine murder victims were the guilty parties despite there being no evidence to justify this. The attack upon the victims by Searchlight is reprehensible and groundless. The attacks upon the victims draw attention from the real issues at stake. Additionally, these attacks serve as a biased attempt to mitigate the murder cases in favour of the killers. In this we can see what Searchlight really is about and where its roots lie.. The biased support for the perpetrators highlights the low morality level of the controlling forces behind this organisation.

3.2 The ethnic Origins of the Assailants

Out of the thirteen murders examined in the twelve cases we find that eight directly or indirectly involved black assailants (Sharon Beshenivsky, Nick Padget, Ronnie Ketteridge, David Sheehan, David Driscoll, Mark Wetherall, Jolen Colpus and Aaron Chapman). We find one killed by a Chinese (Allen Chappelow). We find one killed by an Asian (Stuart Watt). We find one killed by Kosovans (Vincent Swift). We find two killed by perpetrators that fled to Cyprus (Keith and Mathew Cowell). The thirteen murder victims appear to all have been murdered by non- British nationals or non- indigenous British.

3.3 The Element of Racism

In order to examine the twelve cases for Racism we must look at what we perceive as Racism. It would probably be apt to succinctly define Racism as an irrational hatred of other peoples that have evolved in different ways … alternative ways of development that conflict with the ideas of other races forming hatred between those peoples that culminates in irrational hate driven attacks. In the U.K. we have sub- cultures forming with people born in these sections of society that conform no more to ‘traditional’ British culture than an Eskimo living abroad. In these sub- cultures the original ethnic characteristics of the particular race is retained. The Government acknowledges the retention and existence of different race characteristics in minority ethnic British sub- grouping. The fact is that two British born people from different sub- groups can be involved in a racist incident against one another even though technically of the same race. A derogatory phrase used against a British born person of Pakistani parentage could be used to uphold an allegation of Racism even though British born and insulted by another British person. A case where a Welshman recently successfully prosecuted a Scotsman for referring to him as “BOYO” highlights the fact that the official version of Racism goes beyond the colour of skin and place of birth as both participants were white and British born (http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/walesnews/tm_objectid=15898324&method=full&siteid=50082&headline=official----boyo--is-a-racist-insult--name_page.html ). Strangely in the Welsh/Scot case there appears to have been no irrational hatred involved. The charge of Racism was addressing nothing more than fatuous name- calling. However, the non- integration by some sub- groups dangerously risks significant future conflict in British society especially where there is a culture clash. Also, inequality brought on by racial and cultural differences found in these sub- cultures appears to be festering into conflict and irrational hatred of the dominant social group in Britain. At the moment the dominant social group still appears to be white. This would explain the high level of attack upon the indigenous white British population by members of these sub- cultures as pointed out in the booklet Racism Cuts Both Ways. The available figures reveal that there is a far higher rate of fatal attack upon white indigenous British born people by non- indigenous people than the other way around. The murder of Vincent Swift was a result of such hatred with his murder conceded by Searchlight as racist. The inclusion of Mr Swift’s case amongst the twelve cases for assessment only serves to highlight the weakness of Searchlight’s argument with them having to resort to this case to make up the twelve. The ethnic origins of the thirteen murder victims involved in the twelve cases examined were indigenous British. The ethnic origins of the killers are confirmed as or probably non-‘indigenous’ British (foreign born or from non- integrating sub- cultures). The twelve murdered victims received treatment at the hands of their killers that portrayed the deepest level of profanity. The barbarity of the crimes suggests a motive of intense irrational hatred. Everything these people had was taken away from in the loss of their lives. It is unlikely that any of the twelve were killed out of love … that leaves the other side of the coin hatred. All twelve cases suggest malice in their execution where one race has murdered another. To hatefully and wilfully murder a person of another race is Racism. The ACTIONS in these cases speak far louder than words and the killings can be nothing other than racially motivated.

4.0 CONCLUSION

The conclusion has been formed from the analysis and findings of the available evidence. Searchlight’s criticism and accusations that the information found in the booklet Racism Cuts Both Ways is unlawful, unreliable and inaccurate has been placed under the spotlight. However, the examination of the evidence reveals that the information contained in the booklet Racism Cuts Both Ways is on the contrary lawful, reliable and accurate. The conclusion is that the allegations made by Searchlight are without substance and has been refuted by an examination of the evidence. Any discussion on this matter in a public debate with Searchlight representatives would be accepted … to date no Searchlight employee has taken up this challenge on any of the issues they raise. I think the apt term is “All mouth and trousers”. The poor quality, amateurish approach and inaccurate work found in Searchlight’s attack upon Racism Cuts Both Ways is revealed in this report:-

· The character assassination attacks made upon the murder victims by Searchlight were concluded as unjustified, unsubstantiated, irrelevant and reprehensible.

· The 142 murders highlighted by the British National Party in R.C.B.W. were deemed BME not racist.

· The figure 167 is not used by the B.N.P. in Racism Cuts Both Ways as suggested by Searchlight.

· The thirteen people, mentioned by Searchlight, arrested in Liverpool for delivering the booklet R.C.B.W. to the public were not charged with any offence. “The police have decided, on the instruction of the Crown Prosecution Service in London, not to charge 13 BNP activists arrested in Liverpool on 22 November for distributing the Racism Cuts Both Ways pamphlet. We understand the CPS considers the pamphlet is not racist”.

· The booklet was not in any way deemed “an incitement to racial hatred” as falsely claimed by Searchlight.

· Only several (a few, not many) of the thousands of councillors and over 650 M.P.s who received the booklet complained over its contents according to Searchlight

· The incitement to fuel hatred against the B.N.P. by Searchlight over the Racism Cuts Both Ways campaign is malicious, politically motivated and groundless.

· The higher ratio of black on white murders has been established in R.C.B.W.

· The detrimental culture clash incidents developing from Sharia Law adherence and privileges of men over women have been accurately highlighted in R.C.B.W.

· The majority of the twelve cases were found to have involved black on white murders.

· The evidence in the twelve murder cases suggests they were all hatefully motivated.

· The thirteen murder victims were all white or indigenous British.

· The murderers convicted all appeared to be either foreign born or non- indigenous British members of non- integrating sub- groups.

· The thirteen murders appear to have been carried out by one race against another with an element of hatred.

· The twelve cases examined appear to have been the result of Racism.

You have just viewed the TRUTH … a TRUTH that you can now compare with the truth of Searchlight.

5.0 REFERENCES

Racism_Cuts_Both_Ways.pdf, 2008, British National Party

http://www.racismcutsbothways.org.uk/ > [Accessed January 2009].

http://www.racismcutsbothways.org.uk/BNP-exploits-the-victims.php > [Accessed January 2009].

http://www.searchlightmagazine.com/index.php?link=template&story=255 > [Accessed January 2009].

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bradford/4451508.stm > [Accessed January 2009].

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article5530970.ece > [Accessed January 2009].

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2544044/Triple-killers-turned-to-knives-when-submachine-gun-bullets-ran-out.html > [Accessed January 2009].

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/walesnews/tm_objectid=15898324&method=full&siteid=50082&headline=official----boyo--is-a-racist-insult--name_page.html> [Accessed February 2009].

Tags: Racism Cuts Both Ways, Nemesis