Friday, 16 November 2007

Nigel Hastilow and James Watson murder Indian sailors, says Tribune

ON October 20, two Goan sailors, Gregory Fernandes and Finod Appa, were brutally attacked by a drunken gang of racist youths in the Hampshire village of Fawley.
Mr Fernandes, 32, and his friend were returning to their ship Garonne, moored alongside the marine jetty near the Fawley refinery, when they were surrounded and beaten. Mr Appa sustained a broken shoulder while Mr Fernandes, who was more badly beaten by the 20-strong gang, later died from his injuries.

Hampshire police said the unprovoked assault was racially aggravated. Shocked residents, ashamed by the racially-motivated attack, held an emotional candlelit vigil.

“The community is in shock”, said the Reverend Barry James of All Saints Church, who led the service. “People are dismayed and ashamed of what happened here, in what is normally a small, quiet, sleepy village.”

Christine English, who lives in Fawley, said: “We’re stunned that an innocent visitor could be killed in a racist attack, not in one of the tougher areas of the city, but in a quiet New Forest village.”

Well, I think that we can all agree that the people who committed this murder are worthless scum, who ought to be strung up. And if I lived in Fawley, I imagine that I would be quite shocked too, to have this kind of thing happen on my doorstep.

However, one thing I should perhaps have mentioned before, is that this article comes from the far-left magazine, Tribune. As a result, the above, pretty reasonable, reporting, is swiftly followed up with this idiotic statement:
A link is now being made between what is said in public by people such as Nigel Hastilow and James Watson and racially motivated violence such as this on the streets of Britain.
Really? And by whom is this link being drawn? And what evidence have they adduced to establish the existence of such a link? Have the unnamed drawers of the link uncovered evidence that, for example, racist violence by whites against non-whites rose sharply in the aftermath of Prof Watson's comments, or Mr Hastilow's article?
Nigel Hastilow was the Conservative parliamentary candidate for Halesowen and Rowley Regis in the West Midlands until his racist remarks – that Enoch Powell was right to talk about “rivers of blood” in his infamous speech on black immigration – embarrassed Tory leader David Cameron. James Watson is the controversial scientist who caused a row when he spoke of the “inferiority of black people”.
So, I guess we're not going to get any answers to the questions I raised in my previous paragraph. What we do get is the throwing around of the word 'racist', as if that is actually probative of anything.
We also get a bit of apparently deliberate dishonesty and misrepresentation. First, we are told that Enoch Powell talked "about 'rivers of blood'". Now, while his famous speech from 1968 has been dubbed the "Rivers of Blood Speech", Powell never actually used the phrase himself. He did refer to "the River Tiber foaming with much blood" (a quote from a passage in Virgil's Aeneid) but he never actually said "rivers of blood". And yet the author of this piece, Paul Donovan, appears, from his use of quotation marks, to imply that the words are taken verbatim from Powell's speech. This is patently untrue, although Mr Donovan might perhaps argue that his untruth serves to illustrate a wider truth.
The second, and more egregious, misrepresentation occurs when we are told that Prof Watson "spoke of the 'inferiority of black people'". Again, the use of quotation marks in this context would seem to suggest - and suggest quite strongly - that Watson himself actually used the phrase "inferiority of black people". Well, if he did, then it isn't mentioned in the Sunday Times report of the interview which sparked off the whole witch hunt last month. Furthermore, not only did Watson not use the phrase "the inferiority of black people", but he also did not use any other words or phrases tending to imply that blacks are inferior. On the contrary, he specifically said that there should be no discrimination on the basis of race. As such, it is hard to escape the conclusion that, unless Mr Donovan should happen to be privy to information withheld from the rest of us, then he is deliberately attributing to Prof Watson, not only words which he did not actually speak, but also sentiments which he did not actually express.

Content with this little piece of deception, Donovan continues:

When the Labour Government came to power it set up the MacPherson inquiry to look into the racist killing of Stephen Lawrence in 1993. The inquiry’s remit was later extended to examine racism nationwide.

Lord MacPherson’s final report made 75 recommendations, many of which have been implemented. Race crime was upgraded among police priorities and heavier sentences handed down where racial motivation can be proven.

True. I don't personally think that that's a good thing, except insofar as it increases some sentences which might otherwise be woefully inadequate, but it certainly is what's happened.

Despite this, racially motivated violence has continued to increase in Britain.
True. But what Mr Donovan omits to add is that most racist crime is directed against white people. In 2004, white people were the victims in 51% of all racially-motivated crime, in 61% of cases of violent racist crime, and in fully 83% of the most serious instances of racist violence. Once these basic facts are known, then the whole issue of racism appears in a rather different light from that in which Mr Donovan is attempting to cast it.
While violent crimes such as the murder in Liverpool of black teenager Anthony Walker are the most extreme form of race hate, the Institute of Race Relations points out that “every day on the streets of the UK, in playgrounds, classrooms, shops and at work, minority ethnic people are racially harassed.”
And that's wrong, and those who perpetrate such offences should be punished. But still more frequent than a non-white person being racially harassed by a white person, is a non-white person racially harassing a white person.
The contributions to public debate made by people such as Mr Hastilow and Professor Watson and, before them, Enoch Powell create an atmosphere in which it is easier for racists to operate.
Any evidence for that?
Race relations legislation – and changing attitudes – mean that blatant racism of the sort that saw signs reading “No blacks, no Irish” displayed in windows no longer exists, but racism has become more covert.
Any evidence for the existence of this new "covert" racism? No? Well, actually there is, after a fashion:
Peter Hain, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Wales, said that Mr Hastilow’s remarks exposed the racist underbelly of the Conservative Party.
There's your evidence: Peter Hain says so. I suppose that is evidence, of a sort. Whether we should attach any weight to it is, of course, a rather different matter.
And anti-racist campaigners fear that when someone such as Mr Hastilow or Professor Watson expresses their inflammatory racist views in public they give succour to those intent on racial violence on the streets of Britain.
Some questions:

1. Who are these "anti-racist campaigners"? Why doesn't Mr Donovan name them and quote directly from them (or fabricate some quotes, since that seems to be his style)? Or is it in fact the case that Mr Donovan is expressing his personal views, and attributing them to "anti-racist campaigners", in a bid to give them some added moral authority (yes, I know that race hustlers have no moral authority whatsoever, but I doubt that Mr Donovan knows that)?

2. What evidence is there that when Nigel Hastilow or James Watson expresses an "inflammatory racist view" (i.e. a view with which Paul Donovan does not agree), violent thugs "intent on racial violence" derive succour? Do such thugs actually sit around thinking "hmm, James Watson made some remarks about race and IQ, therefore it's okay for me to kill an Indian"? Did racist violence against non-whites increase in the aftermath of the comments of either Mr Hastilow or Prof Watson? Does Paul Donovan's article consist entirely of unverified assertions?

That last one's easy...

“The tragic death of Gregory Fernandes proves how important it is to confront racism in all its pernicious forms,” said the Institute of Race Relations this week.
Well, I'd agree that the murder is tragic. And I'd also agree that racism should be confronted. I imagine, however, that my definition of what racism is would differ substantially from that endorsed by Paul Donovan, or the Institute of Race Relations.

11 comments:

JuliaM said...

Yeah, because sailors never got into fights after visiting drinking establishments before Nigel Hastilow exercised his right to an opinion....

JuliaM said...

Incidentally, when you look at other news reports on the attack, it appears to have been more of a crime of opportunity (the two sailors were there at the wrong time) than a targetted racial attack:

"Following his death, residents said Fawley and nearby Blackfield were being blighted by underage drinking and antisocial behaviour.

They complained that householders were having to put up with foul language, late-night disturbances and ever-increasing vandalism.

Last week they took their complaints to a meeting of Fawley Parish Council's amenities committee, which debated the issue for almost an hour.
advertisement

Villagers said police often failed to respond to calls about yobbish behaviour - but officers at the meeting claimed that many incidents were not reported."


Police not dealing with incidents unless they can tick a 'racial crime' box..?

Well, I'm shocked!

Anonymous said...

Donovan also said "the racist killing of Stephen Lawrence" despite the fact that since no one has been convicted for the crime it cannot be known what the motives for it were.

Guardian apostate said...

Great post. I wish you'd left it as a comment on the Tribune site. It may even wake up a few of the poor souls who read that stuff.

BFB said...

One of Lawrence's killers was heard to say "What? What, nigger?" which sounds like a question to me and strongly implies that he said something to provoke the attack, something the media have been playing down.

There is actually no evidence that the killing was racially motivated, save for the use of the word 'Nigger' which does not prove anything other than the fact that one of the killers 'may' have been a racist, it does not prove that the 'motive' was racial or that all the attackers were racists.

Excellent post, FR, keep it up.

muzzylogic said...

But what Mr Donovan omits to add is that most racist crime is directed against white people. In 2004, white people were the victims in 51% of all racially-motivated crime, in 61% of cases of violent racist crime, and in fully 83% of the most serious instances of racist violence.

But it's worse than the raw figures show: whites are still the majority of the population, yet a minority is committing most of the "hate" crime. Their propensity to commit these crimes is obviously far higher than ours. As the white majority shrinks, the problem will get even worse. And it seems certain that liberal propaganda about white racism contributes to these attacks: how many blacks have taken direct revenge for Stephen Lawrence or feel, with Asians and others, that crimes against whites are justified because of white racism?

I am intransigently opposed to Islam, the spread of post-modernist nihilism, socialism, and multiculturalism.

Why not to immigration? It's the cause or facilitator of the other plagues.

Fulham Reactionary said...

Muzzy Logic:

"But it's worse than the raw figures show: whites are still the majority of the population, yet a minority is committing most of the "hate" crime. Their propensity to commit these crimes is obviously far higher than ours. As the white majority shrinks, the problem will get even worse. And it seems certain that liberal propaganda about white racism contributes to these attacks: how many blacks have taken direct revenge for Stephen Lawrence or feel, with Asians and others, that crimes against whites are justified because of white racism?"

An excellent point. Indeed, the fact that anti-white racism is such a significant problem (at least relative to white racism) is one of the reasons I fear the demographic change that is taking place in this country, and Europe as a whole. After all, if non-whites, at 9% of the population, commit 20,000 serious racist attacks each year, how many would they commit at 30, or 40, or 60%? I believe that for any putative white minority in this country life would in all probability be extremely unpleasant.

"Why not to immigration?"

Search the blog for 'immigration', and you may find that I'm not overly keen on that either...

againstthewall said...

Im sorry for the guy who copped it but when was the last time a candle-lit vigil was held for a white victim?

As for the 'racist' attackers what evidence is there for a racial motive? I reckon we have a Commie journo just trying to give us decent racists a bad name.

Anonymous said...

poms in goa watch out - someone might pick you at random and beat the sh** out of you

Anonymous said...

this is murder - plain and simple.
shame on the english - racist cowards to gang up against an innocent visitor. they claim to be civilized - but they are a bunch of senile barbarians. ironically they want to live in goa ! if they do succeed to buy property and move to goa i wonder how safe they would be. while goans are normally tolerant, incidents like this are on the rise - now wonder no one wants english people in goa anymore - they dont deserve to be here.

Anonymous said...

Its a load of crap whites do not receive more racism than ethnics- ethnics just dont report it because it has unfortunately become a fact of life for us.

Im british but racists cant see past the colour of my skin. I believe no one should have to be a victim of violent crime racist or non racist.

The simple problem in this country is that there is a increasing number of teenage males and older looking for an excuse to beat people up because they are angry and irresponsible and they have no respect and rather with deal with messes in their own life they target others. They need to grow up and appreciate the gift of life because you are a longtime dead!