Racism on public transport

In mid-August 2012, a video was published at the YouTube site.

It shows Vandell Brooks ranting nastily at white people for no apparent reason. It was a 'racist' outburst somewhat similar to the one that saw Emma West and Jacqueline Woodhouse charged, found guilty and locked up.

I say 'somewhat'. The brutish and threatening quality of Ms. Brooks was far in advance of the admittedly foul-mouthed unpleasantness of the other women.

After she was taken into custody by the police, Brooks was bailed to appear at Thames Magistrates Court on 23 November 2012.

She didn't turn up.

On 12 January 2013, she was found guilty of racially and religiously motivated harassment and failing to appear in court and was sentenced to seven days prison and a £200 fine.

Here's what provoked this sentence:

Compare and contrast the above with Emma's outburst:



Jacqueline's inebriated rant can be seen below:



Despite turning up in court at the prescribed time and behaving less threateningly than Vandell Brooks, Jacqueline Woodhouse was jailed for TWENTY ONE WEEKS for acting as she did! That's twenty one weeks as opposed to one.

You couldn't make it up, could you?

Those who created and rule our disappearing world do not like the indigenous saying things like this:

"I used to live in England and now I live in the United Nations."

Oh no. They don't like us taking the mickey out of their pet project.

A Mr Juttla was responsible for filming Jacqueline. Speaking after she was jailed, he said:

"I think the judge made the right decision, although maybe he could have given her a bit longer."

The fact that Jacqueline's poor conduct was prompted by being manhandled by a fellow passenger doesn't appear to have been taken into account during sentencing.

Emma has yet to be tried but has already spent more than a month in jail on remand and was kept away from her children AT CHRISTMAS as a result! Her trial has now been adjourned FIVE TIMES! I think this is almost certainly because she is pleading not guilty. Such an unexpected turn of events causes a problem for the authorities. For one thing, a trial would allow her to claim provocation. A black man had spat in the tram close to her and this caused her to react as she did.

The establishment has, thus far, managed to keep this to themselves but, should the case come to trial, Emma's lawyers will, undoubtedly, make much of it.

They also, I imagine, have a major problem with the precedent set by by Ms. Brooks. As can be seen in the videos, her behaviour was worse than Jacqueline's and much worse than Emma's. Surely a smart barrister will make much of this and the light sentence passed upon her.

Political correctness insists that Emma West be made and example of. Unfortunately for those who rule our world, a quick compare and contrast will show them and their PC philosophy in an extremely unjust and discriminatory light.

This is why Emma's trial keeps getting put back. They will be hoping the uncertainly and stress engendered by justice delayed will cause her to change her plea to guilty.

If there is such a thing as racism, ladies and gentlemen, it bears down most forcefully upon the Emmas and the Jacquelines, doesn't it?

The mainstream media in Britain has mentioned Emma West and Jacqueline Woodhouse many times. The same media outlets haven't seen fit to disclose Vandell Brooks' identity and sentence at all.

Here's another compare and contrast from 2011.

A gang of girls attacked Rhea Page for no reason, punched her repeatedly, kicked her in the head and were heard yelling 'KILL THE WHITE SLAG!' However, even though they admitted actual bodily harm, Judge Robert Brown FREED Somali immigrants Ambaro, Hibo and Ayan Maxamed and their cousin Ifrah Nur, after hearing that the Muslim women WEREN'T USED TO BEING DRUNK!!!

Over and over and over again, in web site, blog and internet forum, I keep on telling the British people that the animals at the top of the tree and their pet footsodiers at the bottom are AT WAR WITH THEM! Over and over again the opinion polls tell us that the politician is the least trusted and most despised of all God's creatures and yet, when the elections roll around, over and over again, we vote for more of the same.

Linked below is a REALLY serious incidence of politically correct treachery you've never heard of.

Just as THEY will do their damnedest to air brush the black woman's rant from the picture, the death of Terry Gregory and the appalling outcome of the subsequent trial is one of many immigrant-partial travesties of justice that did not receive the Stephen Lawrence treatment.

Remember, ladies and gentlemen, if you always do what you always did, you'll always get what you always got. Only more of it.

In ten years time it will be the woman on the tram, the Maxameds and the unpunishable killers you'll be voting for.

Or else.

P.S. In reference to the black lady's behaviour, Lee Jasper, Red Ken Livingstone's Senior Policy Advisor on Equalities, has tweeted, once again, that 'black people cannot be racist.'

He has tweeted thus on at least three occasions in 2012 alone, so I guess he means it.

Click on the Twitter image below to enlarge.

When Richard Barnbrook (BNP/Independent) was a member of the London Assembly, he put this question to the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson:

"Please explain why 23 officers are still investigating the murder of black teenager Stephen Lawrence in 1993 and no officers are investigating the murder of white teenagers Richard Everitt murdered in 1994 and Terry Gregory murdered in 2003?"

The written response from the Mayor's office was as follows:

"Neither of the murders of Richard Everitt nor Terry Gregory are the subject of re-investigation as both were solved. Neither murder was determined as a racist killing. The facts and circumstances did not suggest that."

You will note that the Mayor responded to the question by introducing the term 'racism,' which Barnbrook hadn't mentioned. If Boris Johnson's crew were still subject to the ethos prevailing when Red Ken's 'race' advisor, Lee Jasper, was in situe, one must presume that the racism tag applied so liberally to the very few white-on-black killings, could NEVER be applied to the reverse.

As it happens, the Mayor's office was lying/mistaken. Race WAS an issue in the Terry Gregory case. The accusation was used by George Edwin's defence as a mitigating factor in his behaviour that night.

If ever you were in any doubt as to the reality of the war being waged upon the British people by those who want them gone, the government's wildly different treatment of the Gregory and Lawrence cases defines the issue starkly. As does the fact that a jury's opinion of the guilt or innocence of a killer may be swayed by a barrister's cynical use of the 'racist' calumny to influence the proceedings.

In effect, the law has been contructed in such a way that nowadays the defence of 'racial provocation' can ALWAYS be used in a court of law when a black person has attacked a white person, whether or not such provocation actually occurred. On the other hand, according to Jasper's definition, such a defence can NEVER be used when the circumstances are reversed.

The not guilty verdict that allowed Terry Gregory's killer to walk free is as monumental a miscarriage of justice as there has ever been in a British court of law. And yet, no parliamentarian has ever raised the issue in the Palace of Westminster. Stephen Lawrence, on the other hand, has been mentioned in that place well over a thousand times. Jack Straw alone named him more than eighty.

Check out the murders of Terry Gregory and Richard Everitt.

UPDATE:

On 14 November 2012, The Tottenham and Wood Green Journal reported thus:

“A cocaine and alcohol addict who hurled ‘fascist’ insults at Tube commuters was told she deserves to be sent to prison for her crime but A JUDGE SAID HE WAS POWERLESS TO HAND OUT A JAIL TERM.

Rebecca Afeigan, of Palmerstone Road in Wood Green, FORCED THE SUSPENSION OF THE PICCADILLY LINE as she hurled abuse at fellow passengers. However, the 29-year-old PUNISHED ONLY WITH A ‘DERISORY’ £210 FINE.

SHE KICKED AND SPAT AT A POLISH MAN BECAUSE SHE COULD NOT UNDERSTAND HIS ACCENT AND TOLD A BLACK MAN TO ‘GO HOME TO AFRICA’. The incident, which occurred between Manor House and Turnpike Lane, FORCED THE TRAIN TO BE EVACUATED…

AFEIGAN WAS JAILED FOR 23 WEEKS FOR ASSAULT EARLIER THIS YEAR, AND IS CURRENTLY SUBJECT TO A 12-WEEK SENTENCE SUSPENDED FOR 12 MONTHS FOR POSSESSION OF AN OFFENSIVE WEAPON.”

Judge Michael Snow lamented the fact he could not send this black criminal to prison, saying:

"On a packed commuter train, YOU RACIALLY ABUSED SOMEONE BECAUSE OF THE COLOUR OF THEIR SKIN. YOU RACIALLY ABUSED A SECOND PERSON because, with his accent, it was not immediately obvious he was speaking English… How rich to hear something like that from someone like you... YOU HAVE MADE NO CONTRIBUTION TO SOCIETY, YOU REGULARLY TAKE FROM IT, ARE STILL ABUSING DRUGS AND ASSAULTING OUR CITIZENS...

When someone behaves like you, it trashes the image we have held out to the world.”

The image YOU, the Global elite, their wagtail placemen and the PC Crowd have held out to the world, Michael. Image over reality every time. Oh yes, that's your leafy suburb/gated community dwelling top bloke for you.

The Journal added:

“The Judge went on to brand Afeigan a national embarrassmemt and lamented the fact he could not send her to prison. He said she had an ‘appalling’ criminal record of 18 convictions but told her the maximum penalty available for her latest misdeed is a fine.“

In which case, milord, how come the white, non-criminal Jacqueline Woodhouse WAS jailed? More to the point, HOW COME YOU JAILED HER?

That’s right, folks, on 29 May 2012, the very same judge who says he was powerless to jail a violent, drug-addicted criminal with 18 convictions, who spat at and kicked one of the people she was racially abusing, imprisoned Jacqueline Woodhouse. The judge said this of the video clip capturing Jacqueline’s outburst:

“Anyone viewing that would feel a deep sense of shame that our fellow citizens could be subject to such behaviour.”

Shame? I can assure you, Michael that when Jacqueline says the country’s ‘been overtaken' and ‘I used to live in England and now I live in the United Nations,’ many will sympathise with the truth of her remarks.

Jacqueline was pretty foul-mouthed at times. But then she was surrounded by foreigners, some of whom it would seem were determined to take the mickey out of her.

First of all, we see her complaining that a black woman has pushed her. Then, a young man sitting next to her starts singing what we are told in The Mail is the Pakistani National anthem. All the while the aforementioned Galbant Singh Juttla is filming her, insisting that she ‘shut up’, ‘mind her own business,’ ‘watch what (she is) saying' and, generally, stoking her up. Indeed, at one point he tells her that ‘it’s not your country anyway!’

To me it seems that he and the Pakistani facing the camera are deliberately goading her. Indeed other pasengers are heard applauding this second gent’s rabble-rousing antics at one point.

The Mail us us that Galbant Singh Juttla “became distressed by Woodhouse racially abusing a black woman who had bumped into her accidentally.”

Well, Jacqueline didn’t think the bump was accidental. And I don’t think Galba sounds ‘distressed.’ In fact, I think he was having just as jolly a time as the chap sitting next to her was. Speaking after Woodhouse was jailed, Juttla said:

“This sends a message to her and other people like her not to carry on… I think the judge made the right decision, although maybe he could have given her a bit longer…

I was born in this country, and I don't accept any of this behaviour.”

Well, Juttla, old sport, not saying you weren’t born here but I have to say your accent is pretty atypical for a native. Also, I don’t think the fact that you would have 'given her a bit longer' for an inebriated Friday night rant was altogether generous, now was it? It really ought to give you a bit of a clue as to why the Jacquelines, the Emmas and the rest of us never wanted you here. The Daily Mail told us that:

“Woodhouse had drunk an 'unknown' quantity of champagne at a retirement party before getting on the Tube at 11pm… The court heard that Woodhouse had lost her job and was now claiming benefits. But Judge Snow insisted the offence merited a custodial sentence. 'She threatened violence against more than one person. It took place over a prolonged period. Those who were not frightened admirably challenged her, on occasions trying to deflate her grossly offensive behaviour with humour.”

Ah, they weren’t ‘goading’ her then. And this ‘violence’ she was threatening, that would be the threatening ‘violence’ of one lone Englishwoman in a sea of p***-taking foreign men, would it, your honour? The Mail continued:

“The publicity and attention to her case was said to have taken a 'considerable toll' on her mental health and she was prescribed medication for depression.”

That's what this war THEY are waging is all about, folks. As the Greek dramatist, Euripides, once said:

"Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad."

Swap 'gods' for 'globalists' and Euripides, who was born 2,600 years ago, could have been commenting on the way it is now.