What’s the difference between a Muslim punching a policewoman in the face and breaking her nose and a non-Muslim man burning a Koran? The difference is how the police approach these incidents.
When it’s Muslims punching policewomen in the face the police um and ah and prevaricate and so does the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). It took five months for a Muslim who allegedly broke a policewoman’s nose during an incident at Manchester Airport to be taken seriously by Greater Manchester Police (GMP) and then charged by the Crown Prosecution Service.
However when it’s a non-Muslim Briton who burns his own personal copy of the Koran in public, the state and in particular the GMP act wondrously swiftly. In fact this force acted so quickly when compared to how they’ve dealt with either the Manchester Airport incident accused or the Islamic Rape Gangs that have operated and probably still do operate in the Greater Manchester area, that it’s difficult to not think that the recent arrest of a Koran burner was yet another example of two tier policing.
According to press reports, a man went to where is sited the memorial to the victims of the Manchester arena Islamic terror attack and burned his own copy of the Islamic Big Book of Death aka the Koran. He was swiftly arrested and brought before the courts where he pleaded guilty to breaching one of Britain’s increasingly demented ‘hate speech’ laws. He has been bailed until April 29th for sentencing with bail conditions that forbid him from using any social media at all, not merely commenting on his case on social media but a blanket ban on his use of social media. It is likely that Britain’s increasingly Islamopandering judiciary will gaol this person rather than deal with him via any sort of community penalty.
The background to this story is quite sad and shows clearly how the state refuses to take into account mitigation when the defendant is not a Muslim. The man who carried out the Koran burning was clearly suffering from some mental health issues brought on it was claimed in court by him losing is daughter during the current conflict between Israel and the terrorist groups that have attacked Israel. I’ve been in enough courts as a reporter or an observer to know that there are some cases where mercy should definitely be applied and this was one of them. The problem is that the state has no mercy when it comes to those who criticise Islam.
There’s a whole lot about how this case has been handled that stinks to high heaven. Whilst I know that reporters can get access to things like charging information in order that they can properly and accurately report cases, in this case GMP seem to have gone out of their way to publicise not just the defendant’s name but also his age, date of birth and the street where he lives. For the police to do this will undoubtedly put this man’s safety at risk as it is likely that he’s going to be targeted by the very many demented and dangerous followers of the woefully misnamed religion of peace. The decision by GMP to release more information than appears to many to be usual about the defendant has been criticised by many including the Free Speech Union.
I was following this case since before it actually occurred. I saw what I believe is the defendant’s post on social media saying that he had been pushed over the edge mentally with the final push being the murder by Islamists of Salwan Momika the Islam critic in Sweden recently. He told everyone what he was going to do and when he was going to do it. I can understand this person’s disgust at the ideology of Islam, many Britons are just as they are disgusted by Islam and its many hatreds that it contains, as they are of Fascism or Communism or National Socialism, but in my view he planned this stunt badly and dealt with the aftermath badly.
First of all he should not have spoken about what he was going to do prior to doing it. By doing this he gave the police time to organise a response and also for Islamists or Islamist adjacent Muslims to be there as well. I can see a whole lot of ways that this protest could have been more effective and those ways range from not telling anyone what he was going to do until the last minute or even dropping mutilated Korans all around in random places. Back in the 90’s I did flyposting for gigs that I was involved in but I didn’t tell anybody I was flyposting and neither did I say to anybody where the posters were going to be flyposted, because with stuff like that you never really know who’s going to grass and who isn’t. What applies to flyposting might also apply to contentious political activism and activist stunts. Both those courses of action, keeping schtum until the last minute or protesting about the Koran in some other manner would have made it less easy for the police and the Islamists to respond in the way that they did. Of course I’m not saying that people should do this, just that if people are going to do political stunts then they need to be better planned than this one was.
Secondly if this guy was so confident in his belief that burning a Koran was the right way to protest then why on earth did he plead guilty? It’s likely that he was, like many of those prosecuted for social media posts in the wake of the post Southport Atrocity public disturbances, allegedly pressured to do so by persons unknown, probably by them saying to him ‘plead guilty and you won’t be held on remand’. If you believe that what you are doing or saying comes under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights which protects freedom of expression then you elect a jury trial. Although it isn’t a guarantee of an acquittal, airing your views and your right to hold your views in front of a jury of normal, ‘man on the Clapham Omnibus’ type people, might constitute a better chance (especially if you have a competent Barrister to represent you -sadly I’ve seen a lot of incompetent ones) of acquittal than pleading not guilty at a Magistrate’s Court. This is because Magistrates or District Judges who see the same police witnesses appear in front of them day in and day out, get to overly trust such police witnesses and can therefore be influenced into bias by familiarity. Also when you plead not guilty in a Magistrate’s court there’s a fair chance that your case will be tried by a Magistrate who has been heavily picked in DEI and Diversity bullshit as part of their training.
The guilty plea by this defendant might even have made it more difficult for others to challenge the ideology of Islam. The fact that he admitted breaching a bullshit law about giving offence on racial and religious grounds might create somewhat of a legal precedent and legitimise what are laws that should never have been enacted in the first place such are their dangers to free speech.
What should alarm people about this case is the naked two tier approach that GMP seem to be taking here. They behaved one, excessively liberal, way when it was Muslims kicking the shit out of police officers and quite another when the issue was Muslims being ‘offended. We should be able to trust our police officers to police us equitably and impartially but I see little in the way of equity and impartiality in any of the GMP’s actions over the last year.
If you don’t believe that we have two tier policing then ask yourself this: Would GMP or any British police force for that matter go all in like they did with the Koran burning if it was a Bible or a Tanakh or anything other than a Koran being burned? I think that we all know the answer to that one. The police would not be so eager to intervene if this was the situation. We are in a position where Islam and only Islam is protected by the organs of the State. Muslims and Leftists can parade their support for jihad against Jews or show support for banned organisations like Hamas and very little, if anything, happens to those who do so. Nobody should be prosecuted for burning their own copy of a book whether that be the Koran or the Bible or Mein Kampf or Das Kapital or even Fifty Shades of Grey. You may not like book burning as a form of political protest but it should not and must not invite the attentions of either the police or the legal system. We should be free to speak and free to burn books as a form of protest.
We do have two tier policing and a two tier justice system and if you don’t believe that this what is happening or foolishly believe the denials about two tier policing on propaganda outlets like the BBC, then you have not opened your eyes enough to see what is going on.
