A nice little earner

 Tarique Ghaffur - said to have received £300,000 for "being sidelined"

My good friend the committed BNP campaigner Donna Treanor has obtained some interesting information from both the Metropolitan police and also from the Equality and Human Rights commission by means of Freedom of Information requests.

The results can be viewed at the foot of this posting and reveal some illuminating details

The first set of figures show the number of racial discrimination claims logged against the Metropolitan Police over each of the last five financial years and appear to indicate a consistent average of 40 cases a year, primarily brought by Police Officers, but also by Police Staff, Community Support Officers and also a small number by Traffic Wardens

Given the much publicised fact that the total number if ethnic minority officers in the Met only reached 3,000 in 2009, this figure is actually more significant than it first appears particularly in the post Macpherson police force 

More significant than the numbers however, are the figures relating to concluded cases which can also be viewed at the bottom of this posting, these show that only a tiny proportion of cases were actually lost by the Metropolitan Police Service, and of those which were, by far the majority were successfully appealed by the MPS. 

Of the rest a number were withdrawn, suggesting either a change of heart on the part of the complainant or, more likely, their advisers may have warned them there was scant chance of their claim succeeding.      

However, each year a significant number of cases were “settled” to a degree which does not make sense considering that when the MPS fight a case to its conclusion, they stand a statistically good chance of winning.

Settling is, of course, easier, especially when it is only taxpayer’s money which is being shelled out, and who is to know how many complainants have been encouraged in making unfounded claims on the strength of the Met’s penchant for settling out of court rather than fighting as case.

The figures which Donna obtained do not disclose the seniority of those making complaints or the size of the settlements paid out.  However, in view of the fact that former assistant commissioner Tarique Ghaffur accepted a settlement of £300,000 ($475,000) after he claimed he had merely been “sidelined” one can assume the settlements may have been quite generous.

All this at the taxpayer’s expense despite evidence based upon the outcomes of those cases which the Met have contested, that a large percentage of these claims are bogus.
    
The figures relate to just one of the 39 police forces in England, not to mention those in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, together with the various other UK law enforcement agencies,   however, if these results are reflected in other forces and indeed across the public sector it is clear that vast sums are being paid out, not least in undefended settlements.

It should not be forgotten that compensation and out of court settlements are only a part of the cost of these proceedings. If one adds to that the cost of administering, adjudicating and defending such cases it is starkly obvious that the race discrimination industry is a very costly drain on the public purse, and a very unwelcome one in our current age of austerity.

Being the industrious individual that she is, Donna has also obtained a further set of figures by means of Freedom of Information legislation.  These show details of the cases of racial discrimination brought against that insidious government QUANGO the Equality and Human Rights Commission by its own staff.

The outcome of these are rather different than those brought against the Metropolitan police, and suggest to this writer that the EHRC have robustly defended themselves against all such claims and only settled in one case in which they paid out the relatively paltry sum of £2,000, a far cry from Assistant Commissioner Ghaffur’s lottery style winnings.

This is hardly surprising given how embarrassing it would be for an organisation allegedly dedicated to the enforcement of equality to be repeatedly found guilty of discriminating against its staff.

However, notwithstanding the number of cases which have been withdrawn, struck out or won by the EHRC, it is quite remarkable for an organization of its type, set up only four years ago this month that already fourteen members of staff have seen fit to formally raise allegations of racial discrimination against it.

It is debatable as to whether this says more about the organisation or the nature of those it employs.

Once again these cases have been administered, Judged and defended at taxpayers expense, and you can be sure that “Human Rights” lawyers do not come cheap.

As I have pointed out many times on this blog, we are constantly informed that migration to the UK has brought countless benefits, but it is becoming progressively more difficult to identify quantifiable evidence of such benefits.

There is self evidently no benefit to the tax payer in being required to subsidise these cases, and it is an indisputable fact that we would not have to fund these cases were we not living in an imposed multiracial society.

____________________

Click on the images below to enlarge them

No. of Race Discrimination cases brought against the Met in the last 5 years

Concluded Race Discrimination cases

Race Discrimination cases brought against the EHRC

A Nail in the Fuse Box: The Persecution of the British National Party

By Sean Gabb

The suppression of political parties is becoming an interesting feature of life in the managerial superstate known as the European Union It happened six years ago in Belgium, to the anti-immigration Vlaams Blok. And in London, High Court hearings have just (November 8^th and 9^th) that will determine the fate of the British National Party. Since judgment was reserved, we do not yet know whether BNP assets will be seized and whether party leader Nick Griffin, who is an elected Member of the European Parliament, will be sent to prison. We do know what has become of England: it is now a soft totalitarian police state.

For those who may be unaware of it, the British National Party is what its name says it is. It opposes immigration and the associated political correctness and attacks on freedom of speech and association. It also opposes British membership of the European Union and British involvement in wars of military aggression that do nothing to secure the peace and prosperity of the British people. And it is contemptuous of the claims about man-made climate change that are an excuse for the massive enrichment of ruling classes everywhere.

Not surprisingly, the BNP is not popular with the British ruling class. This has been hard at work for at least two generations on destroying a constitution that, since the High Middle Ages, had been uniquely effective at restraining power. This is a ruling class that rejoices in having put common law protections through a shredding machine; and in alienating sovereignty to a mass of foreign and even unknown organisations, to the point where democracy has become a joke; and in sponsoring the mass immigration needed to reduce working class living standards and to justify totalitarian “anti-racist” witch-hunts.

Yes, not surprisingly, the BNP is a witch that must be hunted. It is described as a “racist” party, and its members as violent and even psychopathic criminals. Its leader, Nick Griffin, is remarkable for his ability to assemble softly-spoken persons of quality into something like a baying mob.

To describe all the ways in which Mr. Griffin and his party are persecuted would take an essay which would also be a dissertation on the growth of the British police state. I have not the space to write such an essay. Therefore, I will look at the two chief current persecutions.

Continue reading at VDARE.COM

__________
Hat Tip: KW

Glimpsing the beasts

I recommend an article written this morning by my good friend and ideological brother the Green Arrow, entitled “The BNP are Open for Business”, in which he analyses the outcome of the legal action brought against the BNP by the state funded and quite clearly Stasi inspired quango the Orwellianly named Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).

I find the Green Arrow's view that the outcome was pre-planned, and that the judge was merely delivering the judgement required of him very compelling. It was an outcome which those behind the EHRC prosecution, and most likely behind the judge himself, believed would throw the BNP into internal turmoil at a time when unity was most vital. It was no coincidence that this case occurred now, weeks before a general election where, following the success in the European poll, the party is expected to make gains.

The BNP have had the same membership rules for almost 30 years, yet it is only now that the establishment noticed they are discriminatory? I think not.

This was a deliberate attempt by the establishment, with their tame judge on side, to drain the party financially and cause internal conflict, so as to damage its chances right before the upcoming vote.

How they misjudged the BNP. One can imagine their disbelieving horror when, as a result of the earlier hearing, the resolution to change the party's constitution in order to admit non-whites as members, was passed almost unopposed. That was supposed to split the party in two and alienate its core supporters. What a miscalculation by the EHRC, who had clearly made the mistake of believing their own propaganda and expected the party to behave like the dimwitted racist thugs they and their chums in the controlled media like to pretend they are.

How they must have panicked when that did not result in blood on the floor and an irreparable schism within the party as they had expected.

You can just imagine little weasel Wadham rushing from shyster lawyer to shyster lawyer patching together a rear guard attack and coming up with the ludicrous claim that it was discriminatory for a political party to expect its member's to support it's aims.

In an honest society nobody would have expected a judge to buy such an argument, however, Britain long ago ceased to be an honest society, and any recently awoken coma patient, who still believes it is has not encountered the likes of the obedient Judge Paul Collins, a man who would no doubt have judged yellow to be pink had his bosses told him to do so.

However, once again the BNP's enemies had underestimated it, they had not expected Nick Griffin to act so decisively and even more so, they had not reckoned with the BNP's supporters who know exactly what they are up to and are not going to play their games.

Certainly there have been some mutterings at the elephant's graveyard otherwise known as the Stormfront forum. However, like the UAF before them, the EHRC would be fools to think that Stormfront is representative of the BNP. There are many on Stormfront who care more about descending to Valhala in fiery glory than they do about winning elections, and, in any event, would would be more likely to vote for George Galloway or even Islam4UK than the BNP merely because there is a greater chance the first two will say something nasty about the Jews.

The average BNP supporter knows what type of enemy we are up against, understand its tricks and are standing firm.

I also agree with the Green Arrow that this judgement may in fact have done the BNP a considerable amount of good. If nothing else it has exposed what is really happening in this country to anyone honest enough to look, and has shown to be true much of what has been dismissed as conspiracy theory.

If you examine this judgement, its malevolence is quite shocking.

The following are the passages from the BNP constitution which the EHRC considered to be discriminatory a view supported by the court who have ordered the BNP that they can not require its members to sign up to:

Section 3.2.1.: Our party is a party of British Nationalism, both ethnic and civic, and we are committed to the principle of national sovereignty in all our British Homeland affairs and of self determination and sovereignty in all Indigenous British affairs.
We are pledged to the continued creation, fostering, maintenance and existence of the unity and of the integrity of the Indigenous British and of the government of the countries of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and of Eire, which together, and as further expanded in Schedule 1 (“Interpretation Rules”), are referred to in this, our constitution, as our “British Homeland.”

and

Section 3.2.3. : We are pledged to stemming and reversing the immigration into our British Homeland that has, without the express consent of the Indigenous British, taken place since 1948, and to restoring and maintaining, by legal changes, negotiation and consent, the Indigenous British as the overwhelming majority in the make-up of the population and expression of culture in each part of our British Homeland.

In effect, the law of our land is now saying that it is illegal for a political party to seek to preserve the culture, identity and indeed very existence of the native peoples of these islands, and that it is illegal for a political party to oppose immigration.

That is the message which Friday's judgement sent out to the British people, and when they understand it, which they will, there are many who will not like it.

The widdling little whippet speaking on Sky News on Friday night may find the term “indigenous Briton” offensive, but most Britons do not feel quite the same.

This prosecution and this judgement is the clearest evidence for the British people that the British establishment is determined to destroy them and to replace them. Anyone who does not see that is either mad or deliberately and maliciously blind.

Many will not care, some will never care, but, just maybe there are enough who will care.

So what now?

Many believe that this judgement will enable non-whites to join the party and seek to destroy it from within. Sadly, that is absolutely true, they can indeed seek to do that. However, the threat is actually no greater than it has ever been. Throughout the BNP's history it has had far more white enemies than it has had non-white ones. It has always been possible for the BNPs many many thousands of white enemies to join the party and seek to destroy it from within, many believe some have already tried, yet the party is still here, and it is getting stronger.

Certainly in the short term some will try, and there will inevitably be attempts to claim bias and discrimination, but that is a fact of modern Britain and not exclusive to the BNP.

I do not deny there are downsides to what has happened. However, patriots in a land ruled by traitors must face up to many challenges and this judgement will just add a few more to the many challenges we must, and will, overcome.

However, this court case has also presented the BNP with great opportunities if it is prepared to grasp them.

There are those within Britain's ethnic minorities who wish us well. There are those with the Hindu, Sikh and Chinese communities who have great affection for the British, and who, most importantly, do not seek to take our country from us. If the BNP embrace those who support our cause and wish us no harm, then our enemy's loudest weapons loose their power.

Furthermore in the short term this attack on the BNP has won us publicity, and some sympathy, albeit some of it grudging.

However, there is one unintended consequence of what has happened from the BNP could benefit tremendously and which will last. The one thing this malevolent, vicious and hate fuelled attempt to destroy us has proved is that we were right and that we always have been.

The rulers of our land have briefly lifted a veil and, for a moment, an ugly, snarling face was revealed, many glimpsed the beasts behind the EHRC, and those who understood what they saw will not forget.