Jewish Involvement in the Diversity Agenda, Part 1: The Suppression of Free Speech in Britain

Islam Versus Europe
November 18, 2013

Jews: They are in your country, suppressing your basic freedoms.
Jews: They are in your country, suppressing your basic freedoms.

Following some of the critical remarks I’ve made about the conduct of Jews recently, some people have responded with puzzlement and said they haven’t seen any proof of Jewish involvement in what we might call the diversity agenda, a term I use to mean support for immigration, multiculturalism and the criminalisation of free expression. As I observed before, asking for proof of this strikes me as like asking for proof that fire is hot. The proof is everywhere around us. Reading the newspapers on a daily basis, one constantly confronts the spectacle of Jewish journalists mocking or denigrating expressions of European patriotism or any dissent from the establishment multicultural line. However, some of the people asking this question seem to be sincere. So I will patiently assemble an unassailable body of evidence that will put the issue beyond any doubt.

This will most likely be a long series of posts. I may publish as an ebook in the end.

But before we begin, let us ask what the appropriate response from Jews would be to the case I am going to present. It is not to bleat about “antisemitism”. It is not to assume that the people who “say bad things” about you are motivated by a demonic, irrational hatred stretching back into the mists of time. It is not to think that they must be admirers of Adolf Hitler and want to exterminate you. It is to accept that the criticism is the consequence of your own actions. It is the result of the choices you made, choices that have harmed the interests of other people. When the interests of a people are harmed, it is natural that they should respond with criticism and even antagonism.

In many cases, including the one that follows, the actions I am going to describe were performed not just by individuals that happened to be Jewish, but by organisations that claimed to speak for the Jewish community. I haven’t yet looked into the details of how these organisations function, and how this claimed representative mandate is acquired. But I am not aware of any significant challenges to this mandate having been made.

If you are a Jew who does not support the diversity agenda, as defined above, then you should accept that your interests are being harmed by these Jewish organisations that do support it. They are being harmed in the same way that the interests of any other resident of Europe are being harmed through the alien colonisation process that this agenda, implemented at the policy level, has set in motion. But they are also being harmed because the European people, at least some of them, can see the role of Jewish influence in bringing these changes about and will naturally be resentful of it.

If you are a Jew, you should strive to bring about change within these putatively representative organisations to steer them away from their support for the diversity agenda. If you cannot do that, then you should speak out against them, publicly, disowning the agenda they promote and warning about its consequences. You should consider founding alternative organisations like Jews Against Multiculturalism, Jews for Free Speech, etc. If you do not do any of these things, then you should expect that the peoples of Europe, who have been harmed and are being harmed by Jewish actions, will judge you accordingly.

To the rest of the Counterjihad movement – and, yes, I am a part of it whether you want me to be or not – I urge you to abandon your cowardice on this issue. It is no longer morally defensible. Despite my urging, I do not expect Jews to be reasonable about this. Like Muslims, they appear to be incapable of rational discussion where criticism of their own conduct is concerned, immediately lapsing into a victim mentality and levelling moral accusations attacking the motivation of the person who offers the criticism. The Counterjihad movement in the US is clearly dominated by Jews. The Counterjihad movement in Europe is not. It is, however, so clearly beholden to the US movement as to exhibit virtually no autonomy from it. It is time for you people in the European anti-Islam movement to free yourself mentally from your state of serfdom. You must be willing to talk about this issue and, if necessary, break with the US part of the Counterjihad movement and start thinking and acting for yourselves. Yes, I know it will be very difficult for you to do without those pats on the head (and, in some cases, funds) you cherish so much from our transatlantic cousins. But I urge you find the moral strength within yourself and make the attempt.

Europe appears to be in a death spiral, colonised by alien peoples, with demonstrably awful consequences, which no one can talk about for fear of the criminal law being applied to the very expression of their opinion. But how did this situation come about? Here I explore the introduction of free speech sanctions in Britain, embodied in the Race Relations Act of 1965.

In this post I rely mostly on specialised newspaper archives that are not publicly accessible. You will just have to take my word for it that the original articles were as I reproduce them here.

The public, mostly Jewish-led, agitation that culminated in the passing of the Race Relations Act started with Jewish indignation at the activities of the National Socialist Movement in Britain.

Legislation that would make incitement to racial hatred a punishable offense was demanded today at a meeting of the World Jewish Congress.

A. L. Easterman, international affairs director of the congress, said the British Government had failed to deal effectively with the revival of fascism and anti-Semitism.

He said that inaction in Britain encouraged fascism in other countries in urging a change in the law.

Three British Fascist or extreme Right-Wing organizations held outdoor meetings that resulted in violence this summer.

An appeals court ruled Sep. 4 that the Public Order Act, which covers such meetings, had not been violated by Colin Jordan, head of the neo-Nazi British National Socialist Movement.

Since then several groups have advocated amending the Public Order Act.

Source: “Law on racial hate is urged in Britain”, New York Times, September 17, 1962.

Source: Association of Jewish Refugees Information, Vol. XVII, No. 10, October 1962

Three petitions, each containing 140,000 signatures, with the common aim of obtaining legislation against the public incitement of race hatred and discrimination, were presented to Parliament yesterday by three M.P.s – Mr. Greenwood (Lab.), Mr. Lubbock (L.) and Mr. Tiley (C.).

…The petitions were organized by the Yellow Star Movement, the Association of Jewish Ex-Service Men and Women, the Board of Deputies of British Jews and the National Council for Civil Liberties.

Source: “420,000 seek law on race hate”, The Times (London, England), Tuesday, Nov 27, 1962

The British section of the World Jewish Congress, holding its biennial conference in London at the weekend, urged the Government to enact legislation against incitement to racial and religious hatred.

The chairman of the British section, Mr J. Halevy, told the conference that 20 years after the brutal annihilation of European Jewry by the Nazis, “antisemitism, though not so virulent, is not dormant.”

Cairo and Buenos Aires, he asserted, were centres of Nazi and Fascist activity.

There was antisemitism in the democratic countries of Europe as well. Mr Halevy believed the Home Secretary was wrong in thinking that education alone could deal with it. Legislation, too, was essential.

Source: “Legislation on racial incitement urged”, The Guardian, Mar 2, 1964

When the Labour party won the general election in October 1964, Harold Wilson became Prime Minister and appointed the Jew Frank Soskice as Home Secretary. Soskice was the son of Russian revolutionary journalist David Soskice, who had “played a considerable role in the political events in Russia up to the founding of the Kerensky republic” (source) then fled Russia for England after being imprisoned by the Bolshevists. With Soskice in the Home Office, active efforts began to be made to bring about the criminalisation of free speech.

In a meeting yesterday with the Home Secretary, Sir Frank Soskice, representatives of the Board of Deputies of British Jews emphasised the importance they attach to early legislation against racial discrimination.

…it is understood that the members of the board were particularly concerned about recent incitement of racial feelings, the persistent publication of literature likely to inflame, and the activities of Fascists at the Leyton byelection.

Source: “Jewish deputation sees Sir Frank”, The Guardian, Jan 15, 1965

The Race Relations Act went through Parliament in 1965, finally coming into effect on 8 December 1965. It created a new offence of Incitement to Racial Hatred.

Most members of the Jewish community welcomed the race relations bill recently introduced by the Government, Dr. S. Levenberg told the annual conference of the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland in London yesterday.

Commenting on newspaper reports that Jewish leaders had opposed the Bill, Dr Levenberg, an honorary vice-president of the federation said: “I think I can speak for most of us when I say that we welcome the Bill”. He added: “We welcome the fact that the Government has introduced a bill against racial discrimination and incitement to race hatred. We are pleased that the Government, under Harold Wilson, has kept its pledge to introduce such a Bill which we have wanted for a long time.”

Source: “Race bill welcomed by Jews”, The Guardian, Apr 12, 1965

After the law was passed, Colin Jordan was charged with offences under it and sentenced to 18 months imprisonment in January 1967.

Colin Jordan (43), leader of the British National Socialist Movement, was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment at Devon Assizes, Exeter, yesterday, for offences under the Race Relations Act.

…Before he was sentenced, Jordan, of Tudor Avenue, Coventry, said: “I am to be punished because I sought to save my country from Jewish control and coloured immigration.”

He accused the Wilson government of “treasonable betrayal” in “promoting the coloured immigration and suppression of criticism.”

Source: “18 months’ prison for Jordan”, The Guardian, Jan 26, 1967