By Tim Haydon.
Those who believed that the last drop of anti-white, anti-British spite had been wrung out of the Stephen Lawrence affair have been proved wrong. A high priestess is about to be appointed to the cult of St Stephen. His mother is to enter the House of Lords as a Labour Peer.
You have to ask: If this woman has such a low opinion of us, why is she still here? Why didn’t she go back to Jamaica where she came from, as her ex-husband Neville has done? But perhaps her appointment to the Lords is some of the answer. It just shows what you can get with a lifetime of undermining the British and Britain, calling for enquiries into this, that or the other aspect of the case. She and her leftist backers really have got an enormous amount of mileage out of the death of her son and out of us one way or another, haven’t they?
The murder of Stephen Lawrence was undoubtedly a foul crime, notwithstanding persistent rumours that he was engaged in peddling drugs at the time of it. The grotesque Macpherson enquiry though was dedicated to finding the police officers concerned guilty of unprofessional conduct due to ‘racist’ prejudice, because they had an open mind about the motivation for it and did not immediately conclude that Lawrence was killed solely and only because he was black.
If anyone was biased in this affair, it was this appalling judge, Macpherson, who consistently leant over backwards in favour of the Lawrences at the same time as discounting the explanations of the police.
Apart from rather insignificant deviations, he adopted thoughout the Marxist line that only whites exhibit racism (because the Marxist definition of racism is ‘prejudice plus power, and non-whites are said not to have power). He was so concerned to smear the police with the ‘crime’ of racial prejudice that, apparently oblivious to the glaring inconsistency, he actually attacked the concept of ‘colour blind policing’ because, ‘A colour blind approach fails to take account of the special needs of the person or people involved, and of the special features which such crimes and their investigation possess. ’ In other words, in practice, if the police show racial prejudice that is just fine – when it is in favour of blacks.
It does seem that Macpherson came to this enquiry with his mind made up about racial prejudice and proceeded to ignore evidence to the contrary. Evidence such as that provided by DS Davidson that the two suspects the case were also implicated in the stabbings of two white youths, Stacey Benefield and Lee Pearson, and were just as likely to have murdered a white as Stephen :Lawrence.
MacPherson was adamant that if the police did not agree that the Lawrence killing was motivated solely by race hate, they were guilty of unconscious racial prejudice. The ‘1984’ style allegation of ‘unconscious racism’ on the part of the investigating officers led on to the allegation of ‘institutional racism’ on the part of the whole force – a kind of guilt-by-association condemnation normally found in revolting dictatorships – and by implication, white Britain as a whole.
Such was the uncontrolled bias of MacPherson’s enquiry that it actually went so far as to recommend that ‘racist’ remarks in private should be criminalised. Unbelievable, but true.
Having got the ‘verdict’ of ‘institutional racism’ he wanted from the judge he had carefully selected in order to produce it, the Home Secretary at the time of the Macpherson Report, Jack Straw, grabbed with both hands the excuse it provided for him to oppress the British peoples, primarily by extending the Race Relations Act to the whole of the public sector, including the police. Here is what the columnist Simon Heffer had to say about how Straw was instrumental in demoralising the police in the Daily Telegraph:-
‘It was in Mr Straw’s four years as home secretary from 1997 to 2001 that the cancerous attitudes that have benighted our police really set in – and they were led from the Home Office. The police ceased to be a force and became a service. They ceased to be a crime-fighting operation and became instead an instrument for the imposition of political correctness. New Labour came in to power with a set of beliefs about minorities of all sorts, and sought to make the police the enforcers of that creed. The wheels fell off at that point….’
And apart from demoralising the police and oppressing the British people, as a result of this case we have lost one of our most important defences against state tyranny; the legal rule against double jeopardy.
One would never guess, given all the attention to the Lawrence case that the 10% non-white population of Britain commit 80% of the most serious racial crimes involving murder and assault. The true racism in our country is the anti-white racism of leftists who go on and on about the ‘injustice ‘ of the Lawrence case but ignore the many, many injustices suffered by the native British when it comes to ethnic crimes against whites.
Yes ! Mrs Lawrences’s campaign has been a godsend for New Labour – and the Tories who have aided and abetted it – in the cause of oppressing the British people, stripping us of our ancient rights and demoralising and politicising our police. She is indeed an ideal representative for them in our Upper House.
2
One as to wonder just how many peers the traitors can pack in to that place. I read in the Guardian, that the Electoral Reform Society research suggests that the total number of peers could rise to as many as 2000. This is a place that cost the British tax payers £109m per year and where members just have to jump in a taxi (paid for of course by us), sign in and go home. And if they say they live outside London all the better, that means more of that lovely lifestyle. And I’m sure Doreen Lawrence will be no shrinking violet when it comes to claiming her allowances, just as she was not the shy type when it came to demanding from the Met Police her compensation. It seem all you need to do to get a peerage is denigrate the white British/give money to the political class/ procure young children for the political paedophiles as Jimmy Savile did/give non executive directorships to party ex leaders. So that’s how low this crowd at Westminster have taken the political institutions. And until we get leaders of the type mentioned in the comments section they will go as far as they can get away with.
A brilliant article,Doreen Lawrence won’t be happy till her head is on a 5 pound note ,then that won’t be good enough ! Until she’s on a ten Pnd note ,and it goes on !
Doreen Lawrence has been exceedingly useful to those in power and their puppet media. Wheeled on given any excuse to justify the race replacement policy or at least to silence critics by use of the endless cry of ‘racist’.
But there is a big difference between that and being a part of the ruling system. I predict that Mrs Lawrence will become regarded as a pain in the butt to the House of Lords members as she continues to glower and complain. Being a professional glowerer and complainer is not a good idea in her new role but I suspect she can’t change. Even people who broadly agree will get an earful.
I interpret Doreen Lawrence’s elevation to having outlived her usefulness. It’s easy to forget that the population replacement policy does not exclude the existing black population. They are as expendable as us. When Labour came to power in 1997 they thought they were on their way to glory. I don’t think it’s dawned on them yet that the big parties actually don’t give a hang about them.
Doreen will have much to be bitter about in future.
Doreen Lawrence has herself done nothing more than any other mother in her position would have done, which is to seek justice for her murdered son. In this she is seeking the same as all those other mothers whose children have been murdered. However, Doreen is a pawn of the powerful race lobby and as such has the support of all those activsts/lawyers and of course a compliant media who have elevated her to a position that is beyond her individual capabilities. I would like to know what is the difference between an ‘ordinary’ murder and a ‘racist’ murder, does the mother suffer more in the latter – either way your son is dead and to elevate the victims of one above the other is to diminish some mother’s/father’s/family’s suffering.
Well I’m sure Lady Lawrence will be making her voice very much heard. And I’m sure she knows that her fellow peers are made up of paedophiles and other forms of sick perverts and cowardly traitors that will shiver in fear of her singling them out, knowing full well if they become the centre of her displeasure the media and their paymasters would not be happy with them, and they might be thrown to the wolves, and all their sordid secrets would get to the public’s ears. So no doubt her fellow peers will be all smiley when they have to be around her, but only long enough to claim their expenses.
The murder of Stephen Lawrence has been designated a ‘racist murder’ because this diverts investigation from any other cause of death, e.g. a drugs related murder. For if indeed it was the latter, the aura emanating from St Doreen of Lawrence would suddenly become less than blinding.
How about a place in the House of Lords for the mother racist murder victim Richard Everitt, How about Chris Donald’s mum? Don’t hold your breath though, they’re white!