Commissioner Simon Hayes (of Hampshire Police and Crime Commission) has just commented on the recent arrest of Liberty GB's Paul Weston (in Winchester) for reciting the words of Winston Churchill through a loudhailer.
Mr Hayes' words can be found on the Hampshire Police and Crime Commission website. This is a section taken from his post:
“It has been wrongly suggested that Mr Weston was arrested for reciting passages written by Winston Churchill. I understand he was not welcome outside the Winchester Guildhall, the Police were called and he was asked to move on. I also understand that he was not prepared to move on and was arrested for this reason.”
This appears to have been what has happened so far:
ii) The police then realised that it would be far better - for political and legal reasons - to charge him for committing a “racially/ religiously-aggravated” offence.
iii) Then followed the world-wide negative reaction against the police for arresting someone for reciting Churchill and then audaciously classing it as a “racially/religiously-aggravated” offence.
iv) As a response to all that negative feedback, the police has now reverted back to the original accusation: that Paul West Weston had committed a “risk of disorder” offence.
Of course the young policemen who arrested Paul Weston didn't really know what they were doing. And, at first, neither did the higher authorities in the Hampshire police. So now we have Commissioner Simon Hayes - of the Hampshire Police and Crime Commission - trying to make the best of a bad situation (for the police).
Commissioner Hayes also said that
“[m]embers of the public are of course at liberty to debate issues of importance to them in private or public spaces. However, there must be a level of decorum and decency.”
To state the obvious: “decorum” and “decency” are pretty vague words. There is, however, a good chance that such words are often used by the police and the courts. However, I doubt that they have ever been used within a political context such as this.
Commissioner Hayes also added the word “safety” to the debate. He said - or hinted - that Paul Weston was putting public “safety” at “risk”. Again, how public safety would be put at risk by reciting the words of Winston Churchill will need to be specified at some point.
Despite hinting at possible infringements of “decency” and“decorum”, as well as the added “risk” of reciting Churchill's words to the public, Mr Hayes does say that “if there is any reason to suspect they [the police] have intervened unnecessary [sic], this will be investigated”. However, he then goes on to add: “As far as I am aware, this is not so in this case.”
The Politicisation of the British Police
|Chief Constable Chris Sims|
The strange thing is that Mr Hayes mentions the political nature of what has gone on and then offers his own political analysis of the events. He said:
You would think that political comments like this are not the correct domain of police commissioners. Then again, if you think here about the Chief Constable of West Midlands Police's frequent ideological and political interventions into Muslim/Islamic affairs, you won't be surprised about the increasing political nature of the British police.
|Sparkbrook's terrorists in Birmingham: home of Salma Yaqoob|
As I said, Chief Constable Chris Sims has often got himself involved with Muslim-related issues. In 2010, for example, he was a strong protester against CCTVs being used in the Islamic “terror hot-spots” of Birmingham. In response to threats of “civil unrest” from Lord Ahmed, and continuous Leftist activism from Leftist lawyers, interfaith priests (such as the Revered Roy Gaston) and members of the SWP-UAF and Respect, Chris Sims apologised to the Muslim community (as it's often put) and said that "little evidence of thought being given to compliance with the legal or regulatory framework" before the cameras were put up.
|Muslims rioting in Birmingham (2009): these people do not "gnaw away at the foundation" of our society.|
Chris Sims has also spoken in support of Unite Against Fascism (UAF) and against the English Defence League (EDL). He once said that the EDL is attempting to “gnaw away at the foundations” of our society.
|A "hoax", Mr Sims?|
Much more recently Chris Sims has felt fit to comment on the Islamist plot to takeover schools: again, in his very own Birmingham. His words about the EDL just cited (that it is attempting to “gnaw away at the foundations” of our society) are perfectly applicable to the Muslim school-plotters. Though, of course, the plotters have brown skin: so that's okay according to the inverse or positive racism of the police and of so many other institutions in our day.
When it was made known that an inquiry into allegations of an Islamist plot (to take over 25 Birmingham schools) is to be led by the Met's former national head of counter terrorism (Peter Clarke) , Chris Sims said that it was "desperately unfortunate".
|Definitely not "gnawing away at the foundations" of our society.|
Chris Sims has also made the mistake - which the Guardian and many other Leftists and Muslims have deliberately made – of claiming that all these investigations are a response to a single “hoax” (Chris Sims' word) document which outlined plans for the Islamisation of certain schools. Not at all! The investigations are hardly at all based on that document. They are based upon the many testimonies which ousted (by the Islamists) teachers and governors have given; as well as on various accounts from other people directly involved in these events (from local MPs to inspectors and schoolchildren).
As with his reaction to the Islamic terror-problem in Birmingham, Chris Sims predictably said:
"It must be a concern. People could be made fearful if they think that is the way this issue is being perceived."
Yes, the “issue” of the Islamisation of British schools has no reality, apparently. It is solely down to how it is being incorrectly “perceived” by an “Islamophobic media” which is on a “witch-hunt” against all Muslims.
What has happened here is that for a long time various Leftist activists - from within the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) (or those who believes that racism against white people is a logical/theoretical impossibility) to lawyers and political parties - convinced the police, the public and themselves that all police forces and policemen were inherently biased in a particular political direction. Indeed that the entire body of police was “institutionally racist”. Then, in the last three decades or so, these very same Leftist groups, institutions and individuals have been trying their hardest to make sure that the police is completely biased in a completely different political direction: a Leftist and politically-correct direction. (These activists, lawyers, councilors, etc. have successfully created a new Gramscian/Leftist “hegemony” in sections of the the police, law and elsewhere.)
And my God - hasn't this relentless campaign by the Left been successful? The arrest of Paul Weston and the political interventions of Chief Constable Chris Sims are just two cases which display the deepening politicisation (by the Left) of our police.
Note: The following are the two offences on Paul Weston's charge sheet:
1. Persons aged 10 years or over representing a risk of disorder, failure to comply with a direction from PC *******.
religiously aggravated intentional harassment/ alarm/ distress -
words/ writing 26/04/2014.
According to Paul Weston himself, Commissioner Hayes "should be made aware that the first charge was dropped and I was re-arrested in the police station on the second charge”.