UKIP MEPs home attacked with bricks as campaign of hate against UKIP steps up.

News reaches us that the campaign of violence and intimidation against UKIP has been stepped up a notch. UKIP's London MEP Gerard Batten and his wife were woken at 3:30am this morning by a loud noise in their house. On getting up and investigating they could see nothing and assuming their cat had knocked something over they went back to bed. 45 minutes later, they were woken again by a loud bang followed by the sounds of breaking glass. There was no mistaking the cause this time, as on coming downstairs to investigate they discovered a house brick in the middle of their living room and their living room window smashed. Police are investigating and reviewing local CCTV footage.

This is just the latest in a string of increasingly heated attacks on UKIP supporters, activists and premises and comes just hours before a UKIP meeting in Hove this evening which is expected to be heavily picketed by Hope not Hate and UAF activists. At UKIP's last meeting in the area, Hope not Hate activists verbally abused and intimidated pensioners they believed to be attending the UKIP meeting only to discover that they were in fact blood donors attending a regular NHS donor session in the same building.


Nothing to do with Hope not Hate, says Lowles

Elsewhere, UKIP leader Nigel Farage was assaulted by Hope not Hate activist Andrew Scott in Margate - Scott was subsequently convicted - and by HnH/UAF activist Fred Glenister in Nottingham. Glenister is awaiting trial.

UKIP billboards across the country have been repeatedly targeted in an organised campaign of
destruction, with hard left activists encouraged to post pictures of their handiwork on a Facebook page. Look into the active member's profiles, and you'll see plenty of likes for the usual hard left suspects - UAF, SWP, AntiFa, Hope not Hate and all the rest, mostly combined with 'likes' for various Green Party organisations. The Greens are currently the subject of an internal takeover attempt by the hard left which wants to turn them from watermelons into tomatoes. Hope not Hate and UAF of course claim no responsibility for this and deny it is anything to do with them. Most of the poorly spelt slogans painted onto the UKIP billboards are taken directly from Hope not Hate and UAF literature.

MEPs windows and UKIP billboards aren't the only targets for damage, however. In Plymouth, the UKIP shop on Mutley Plain has had its windows smashed 3 times since

Smashed UKIP shopfront on
Mutley Plain, Plymouth

March. In the Wythenshawe by-election, hard left activists daubed the windows with paint on three occasions, broke in and stole equipment on once occasion and stormed the premises while it was open on one occasion, stealing leaflets and letting off stink bombs. Elderly UKIP by-election campaigners were insulted and threatened while canvassing, and council house tenants were threatened with the loss of their housing unless they removed UKIP posters.

Meanwhile, UKIP meetings have been increasingly targeted by elements of the hard left who find intimidation easier than argument. 'Stand up to UKIP' another SWP front organisation has seen it's demonstrations publicised across many groups - including the billboard group - as Hope not Hate continues to publicise yet another SWP front organisation, Love Music Hate Racism (run by SWP rapist Martin Smith).

Concerns are being raised at UKIP about how long it will be before these increasingly aggressive tactics turn into open violence, particularly given the large UKIP vote expected on the 22nd. Several 'anti fascist'  groups have published the home addresses of UKIP MEPs on their Facebook pages with the suggestion that members 'pay them a visit', while the intimidatory tactics directed at UKIP supporters grow ever closer to open violence. Last week's UKIP public meeting in Westminster saw SWP, UAF and Hope not Hate activists debating whether to use racist terms such as 'coconut' and 'oreo' to describe UKIP candidates from ethnic minorities in a further sign of the lengths they are prepared to go to in order to deter public support for UKIP.

Are Hope not Hate and UAF responsible for the actions of their activists? By their own standards of attacking UKIP based on what isolated individuals say then yes, they are. And yet these are not isolated incidents: UKIP has had a handful of individuals who have said or done stupid things, and has dealt with them all swiftly. This campaign against UKIP of violence, intimidation, assaults both verbal and physical, and criminal damage is widespread and being conducted by significant numbers of people. It is time for the Hope not Hate and UAF leadership to publicly distance themselves from these people: if they will not, that can only be considered as their tacit acceptance of the actions of their activists.

For more updates, follow us on Twitter @nopenothope

HnH/UAF handing out leaflets on your High Street? Stand next to them and dish these out.

 

 

This is not a party political leaflet, and as such does not require an imprint. It should not be delivered with party political literature. It endorses no party, and the SWP, UAF and Hope not Hate do not stand for election - they'd rather just shout from the sidelines.

 

 

What is the point of an anti-fascist organisation if there are no fascists?

Our attention was recently drawn to yet another anti-UKIP campaign ahead of the European Elections in May of this year.

This one would appear to be another UAF/SWP/HnH front. Carefully hosted overseas and using privacy to hide the true owners behind anonymous hosting companies in California it trots out pretty much the rubbish you'd expect.

One phrase which was interesting was this:

"Such a climate of racist and reactionary ideas also creates a fertile breeding ground for fascist organisations, such as the British National Party and the English Defence League."

Which rather flies in the face of experience. In fact, since the rise of UKIP began, we have seen the collapse of both the BNP and the EDL. UKIP have achieved more in the past year than Hope not Hate, Unite Against Fascism and the Socialist Worker's Party have in a decade in combatting the far-right by proving themselves a moderate, non-racist party which still stands up for Britain.

This of course is the reason UKIP now faces such ire from the hard left, and explains the increasingly violent methods they are using to combat UKIP. For Nick Lowles, Martin Smith, Weyman Bennett and the rest, their opposition to fascism was only skin deep and nothing more than a vehicle for their own wider political views which were no more or less fascist than those of their opponents. All of them occupy that strange position where the extremes of political right and left meet and onlookers can no longer tell the difference between the pigs and the men.

The real problem - and the reason for setting up UKIP as a party of the hard right when it is clearly nothing of the sort - is that there is little point in having an anti-fascist organisation if there is no fascism to fight. Hope not Hate is not a campaign, it is a multi-million pound business masquerading as one. The SWP is not a political movement, it is a shelter for rapists and a natural home for those who would destroy that which they can not possess. In both cases, it lends to people who would otherwise be non-entities a feeling of empowerment, of strutting self-importance which far exceeds their true abilities. Nick Lowles, a failed journalist. Ruth Smeeth, who lost a safe Labour seat and can't get voted onto the Labour NEC despite repeated attempts. Martin Smith, a rabble-rousing rapist who has been temporarily shunted out of sight. Weyman Bennett, who has multiple criminal convictions. These are not people who would otherwise be destined for stellar careers, these are the also-rans who cling to the prominence their failing organisations have given them.

We should not mistake their continued attacks for continued success on their part. They themselves are well aware of how thin the rope is on which their survival depends. With recent polls showing that UKIP is the most favourably viewed party in the country the hard left campaigns are in a tail spin: the public no longer believe their shrill hysteria.

Make no mistake, the European Elections are probably more important to these hard left campaign groups than they are to UKIP. At the moment, the traditional political parties - Labour, Tories and Lib Dems - are pinning their hopes on HnH and the rest doing their dirty work for them. With the Lib/Lab/Cons having no clear idea about how to stop UKIP, they are happy to sub-contract the dirty work to the hard left and never mind the ideological differences: the violent intimidation of geriatric UKIP campaigners, the assault of elected UKIP members, the graffiti-ing and theft from UKIP offices.

The real problems for Lowles, Smith, Smeeth and Bennett begin if UKIP garners a large percentage of the vote on the 22nd May. If 30% of the country support UKIP, will the political establishment continue to fund and tacitly support their organisations, or will they realise such campaigns to be counter-productive? You can not after all ask for 30% of the population to vote for you if you have spent the last year telling those same people that they're extremist racists, even if you have done it by proxy.

Naturally, such groups have other purposes. So far they have constrained debate on a wide range of subjects. Doubt whether global warming theories have a sound scientific basis? Heretic. Wonder whether mass immigration is good for the working class? Fascist. Think increased benefit payments may encourage indolence? Capitalist pig-dog lackey.

Be prepared over the coming months to have everything including the kitchen sink thrown at UKIP by these unaccountable rich-man's toys. For the traditional parties, the stakes are high, but for HnH/SWP/UAF it is their very existence which is at stake: if UKIP polls well, they will be discarded without a second thought. Lowles, Smeeth, Bennett and Smith will be queuing up next to Griffin, Brons, Robinson and Carroll at the jobcentre.

Does it really take a £1m organisation to combat people saying rude things about Islam on the Internet?

Hope not Hate last night reposted a Channel 4 news article headlined "EDL 'linked to a third' of

Data based on 'Tell MAMA's figures -
but they are losing their grant because
of doubts about their accuracy

online anti-Muslim incidents".

The report, by the Centre for Fascist Studies at Teeside University, runs to 30 pages of analysis, but suffers from a serious drawback: its data is based on information provided to it by the 'Tell MAMA' campaign. Tell MAMA, which was founded by Fiyal Mughal last year and funded by the government, has just lost its central government grant because its figures were unreliable. In an article on June 9th in the Sunday Telegraph, Andrew Gilligan wrote:

"A controversial project claiming to measure anti-Muslim attacks will not have its government grant renewed after police and civil servants raised concerns about its methods.

The project, called Tell Mama, claimed that there had been a “sustained wave of attacks and intimidation” against British Muslims after the killing of Drummer Lee Rigby, with 193 “Islamophobic incidents” reported to it, rising to 212 by last weekend.

 The group’s founder, Fiyaz Mughal, said he saw “no end to this cycle of violence”, describing it as “unprecedented”. The claims were unquestioningly repeated in the media.

Tell Mama and Mr Mughal did not mention, however, that 57 per cent of the 212 reports referred to activity that took place only online, mainly offensive postings on Twitter and Facebook, or that a further 16 per cent of the 212 reports had not been verified. Not all the online abuse even originated in Britain.

Contrary to the group’s claim of a “cycle of violence” and a “sustained wave of attacks”, only 17 of the 212 incidents, 8 per cent, involved the physical targeting of people and there were no attacks on anyone serious enough to require medical treatment."

 The Teeside report focuses on incidents over a longer timescale, but the figures are broadly in line with those since the Woolwich incident. In the period 1st April 2012 to 30th April 2013, Tell MAMA has recorded 584 anti-Muslim hate crimes, of which 434 took place on-line, as opposed to 150 in the real world. Of these real world incidents, only 8% - 12 - involved 'extreme violence', although there is no indication of what extreme violence means. This is not to downplay the seriousness of assaults, but to show that of the 584 incidents recorded by Tell MAMA, only 2% involved anything more than what amounts to name-calling or insults.

HnH would like you to think that this is commonplace -
but even Tell MAMA's figures show this is not so

Of the real world incidents, only 29 out of 150 involved an identifiable link to the far-right, or 19.3% - a figure the report refers to as 'nearly a quarter', when it is actually 'nearly a fifth'. By 'far-right', the report refers to the BNP, NF and EDL and its offshoots: it specifically excludes UKIP (HnH take note).

There are several gaping holes in this data. Most noticeable is the lack of any indication of how many of the real world incidents which resulted in violence also had connections to the far-right, which leads us to believe the figures were pretty evenly spread. This would mean that statistically only 2.4 violent incidents took place with far-right links of the 12 recorded. Online, the situation was clearer, with 300 out of 434 incidents having links to the far-right, although even here the methodology was not clear - was passing on an internet 'meme' which could be considered anti-Muslim sufficient? As EDL membership is self-selecting and not limited to the UK, it is also not clear to what extent the data is valid.

What is interesting is to turn this data around the other way. Hope not Hate and its associated groups

Once again, HnH prove inept at
sorting data which doesn't fit
their agenda

have an annual turnover approaching £1m, and a significant number of staff. For the past year, it has involved itself in opposing hate crimes primarily against Muslims living in the UK. But that really highlights the scale of the problem facing Nick Lowles and Ruth Smeeth. On Tell MAMAs figures since the Woolwich incident, HnH's expensive organisation has essentially spent the last 6 weeks going after 40 EDL members who said rude things online about Muslims, and a further 17 people who shouted rude words at a Muslim in the street. According to the data in the Teeside report - and merging it with that released by Tell MAMA since the Woolwich incident - it means this expensive organisation has been chasing a mere 796 incidents, the vast majority of

Ruth Smeeth - may have
to step off the HnH
gravy train

which - 554 - amounted to Muslims being called rude names in internet postings. Of the real world incidents, only 12 - or 1.5% - involved violence, and only 2.4 - 0.3% -of those involved the far right. This does not seem to justify the scale of resources which Hope not Hate deploy, and explains their desperation to find another target before their own supporters begin to ask the same questions.

Without UAF to hide behind, Weyman
Bennet is just another political thug

The same problem is also facing the other supposedly anti-racist organisations, chief amongst which is Unite Against Fascism and its various offshoots. Many of these groups like UAF are simply front organisations for other political groups such as the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) who use them for spreading their own propaganda. If organised fascism is seen to be defeated, this audience is lost to them and that
they can not afford to happen.

Hope not Hate is not all about the money. It is about the influence and the power that brings: the access to media which unquestioningly accepts what they say. It is a heady brew, rubbing shoulders with sympathetic MPs and Ministers, editors and journalists. By selectively using statistics, they are not combatting the problem of anti-Islamic attacks, they are making it seem worse than it is, and diverting efforts away from the majority of perpetrators of real-world incidents who have no connection to the far-right. If there is a better example of Hope not Hate failing in its primary task, we have yet to see it.

All of this adds to the evidence that many of the supposed racist incidents are orchestrated not by the far right, but by anti-racist groups desperate to hang on to their positions and bands of thoughtless followers. Incidents such as the careful desecration of Islamic graves we reported on yesterday appear increasingly calculated to extend what HnH and UAF define as 'far-right' into the political mainstream. We have seen continually decreasing attendances at EDL marches which the EDL leadership has attempted to combat by ever more desperate political stunts. We have seen the collapse of the BNP, with its own attempts to hijack the Woolwich incident descend into farce. The English Democrats attempts to harvest disillusioned members has resulted in the collapse of the party. Andrew Brons and his new political party have disappeared.

UKIP should be on their guard. Lowles, Smeeth, Bennett and Smith will not let power slip through their fingers, and will resort to almost any means to prevent their followers seeing their own irrelevance to the political debate. They recognise that unless they successfully convince their own followers that UKIP is more than a political threat, their ride on the gravy train is approaching the terminus, and we should be aware from past experience that there are almost no depths to which they will not stoop to avoid having to step off onto the platform.

 

 

Breivik and Adebolajo, and Hope not Hate's hypocritical stance

In 2009, a group calling itself 'Stop Islamification of Europe' announced a protest at the then new Harrow Central Mosque in Harrow, Middlesex. The protest was subsequently announced on the EDL's Facebook pages, although it was never clear whether the EDL intended to take part themselves. As soon as the protest was announced, UAF announced a counter-protest to take place at the same time.

In all the fuss over who and how many were attending, one important voice was lost. Haroon Sheikh, the Mosque chairman - speaking of both demonstration and counter-demonstration - said, "We would request that the local authority and the police try to put a stop to it. The concern we have is with a large congregation. It's very difficult to control what people would want to do on the day. We would have 200 to 300 people coming here for prayers on a Friday. Emotions will be high if it's provoked, but we will have the police and we will have stewards here."

As it turned out, not many people on either side bothered to listen. The 20 SIOE protesters who turned up were outnumbered by up to 1,000 UAF protesters who repeatedly charged police lines and threw bottles and stones. So far, it was just another UAF gathering, but what made this one different - if only in retrospect - was the presence of Al-Muhijaroun activist Michael Adebolajo, who was captured on video telling a group of UAF protesters that what they did, they did 'for Allah'. Adebolajo was one of the two men arrested recently for the murder of Drummer Lee Rigby.

It is not so much the presence of Adebolajo which is the problem: at the time, he had done nothing illegal, and was as entitled as anyone to be there, even if the local Mosque had asked for people to not attend. No, the thing which is striking about it is the response of UAF since the murder occurred. Weyman Bennett, the UAF leader, has batted away implied criticism with a statement that Adebolajo was 'not on the platform, and was not an official speaker'. While Adebolajo was speaking, a procession of UAF and trades union flags passed within yards, so his words were hardly a surprise to Bennett and his SWP colleague Martin Smith, who passed just feet away.


UAF and Trades Union banners passed within feet of
Michael Adebolajo at the Harrow protest....

 One can just imagine the outcry from UAF if it came to light that Anders Breivik had attended a UKIP meeting in 2009 and had been allowed to hold his own impromptu rally. It stretches credibility to imagine that Nigel Farage could get away with the notion that Breivik 'not being on the platform and not being an official speaker' would be a satisfactory dismissal of concerns.



...as he was spewing his message of Hate, not Hope



There is no love lost between Hope not Hate and the UAF, although there does seem to be a thawing of relations since HnH was taken over by Nick Lowles. Under the Gables' stewardship, HnH recognised that far from being part of the solution, UAF were a part of the problem: the other side of the racist violence coin. Lowles seems to take a more relaxed view, as reports on EDL marches over the past few years demonstrate on HnH's twitter and Facebook feed: the reporters seemed to glory in the violence of running battles between the EDL and UAF, although as most of Hope not Hate's 'feet on the street' were previously BNP activists who a decade earlier would have been in there with fists and boots flying, this is perhaps not surprising.

As Andrew Gilligan discusses in his Telegraph article, the actions of the UAF do not detract from the rise in tensions, they add to it, a point then Harrow Council leader David Ashton made back in 2009: "We are saddened and dismayed that groups from outside the borough have come here and caused unrest. Harrow has an excellent record in community relations and we condemn those who came to our borough from elsewhere to either foist extreme political opinions on us or use religion as a cover for causing trouble."

All of this leaves Hope not Hate's core purpose - fighting racism and fascism - looking rather neglected. Where is the condemnation of Bennett and UAFs pitiful excuses for Adebolajo's presence at the Harrow protest? Back in 2009, nobody knew what Adebolajo would go on to do, but with the benefit of hindsight it is clear that he was an extremist with a future no less notorious than Anders Breivik, even if the number he left dead was smaller. Speaking against Breivik in an article in the Guardian last September, Lowles said, "Sadly, there are many others at large who share his warped ideology. Seventeen people in the UK....have been imprisoned in recent years for terrorist-related offences": the words I have removed and replaced with '....' were 'with far right views'. With those four words removed, it applies as much to UAF as it does to the EDL and the BNP.

But if Hope not Hate can launch an investigation into links between the far right and Anders Breivik and display its results as symptomatic of the approval of the former for the latter, why does the far left not also warrant a similar investigation? With Al Muhajiroun ostensibly a target for Hope not Hate, where is the investigation into the links between the boot boys of the UAF and Anjem Choudhary and Michael Adebojalo?

I will not win many friends in the EDL and BNP by suggesting that such sloppy thinking would not have been a part of Hope not Hate's approach under the Gables' stewardship, but it remains true. Lowles very much takes the view that 'if God is with us, who can be against us', and feels that however fascist the far left becomes, and whatever terrorist organisations it mixes with, the righteousness of his cause outweighs any concerns.

This may have been true were he not simultaneously attempting to make Hope not Hate less a tool to be used against racism, and more a tool to be used against what he perceives to be the political right.
Part of the problem for Lowles is the continued presence at the top of the UAF of such noted Labour Party activists as Ken Livingstone, Diane Abbott and Glyn Ford. Despite UAF being effectively an SWP front organisation, such high profile Labour politicians at its top table - even if they are without meaningful power - makes an attack or even an investigation into UAF politically unpalatable for Lowles. To brand the UAF as fascist would be to brand sections of the Labour Party fascist as well, and that is counter to Lowles purpose as he seeks to align Hope not Hate ever more closely with the Labour Party.

Whether such hypocritical evasions are tenable remains to be seen. Certainly the poor attendance to date at his anti-UKIP meetings have lead to the rebranding discussed yesterday: better to climb on the Woolwich bandwagon and hope nobody notices the tolerance shown by the hard left to Al Mujahiroun in the past. We can not believe that the majority of Hope not Hate support will put up with such hypocrisy for long.

UAFs' "Love Music, Hate Racism" Events run by man accused of rape

Unite Against Fascism's 'Love Music, Hate Racism' campaign is now officially headed by a man accused of rape.
 

Martin Smith - 'Comrade Delta' - was accused of raping a
17 year old girl, but escaped justice at the hand of the SWPs
'Disputes Committee' comprising 5 of his colleagues.

Martin Smith, a former national officer of the Unite Against Fascism campaign, is a close friend and political associate of UAF leader Weyman Bennett, and is listed on their website as the LMHR National Organiser. He is also a former leader and Central Committee member of the SWP, which is the organisation behind UAF and LMHR.

There is a much seedier side to Smith, however. Apart from his string of criminal convictions - most recently in 2010 for assaulting a police officer - there is his role in the rape scandal which has convulsed the Socialist Workers Party in recent months.

News of this first leaked out after the SWP decided that it did not trust the 'bourgeois court system', and decided to deal with the allegations internally through its disciplinary committee: no, really! At issue was a 'Comrade Delta', who was accused of raping a 17 year old SWP member, Miss X.

Miss X was pressured into not reporting the matter to the police, but to pass it on to the party Disputes Committee to investigate. The Disputes Committee found in favour of Comrade Delta, and dismissed the case without further action.

Comrade Delta was in fact Martin Smith, former leader of the SWP and Central Committee member. According to the 'pre-conference bulletin' prepared by supporters of Miss X:

‘In this case, the comrade making the complaint was kept waiting for four hours before she was called to the DC [disputes committee] to give evidence. This added stress made it harder to put her side of the case.


Weyman Bennett, UAF leader who appointed accused rapist
Martin Smith to run an organisation which would give him
access to young girls

‘In this case, the DC made a one-sentence decision — that the allegation of rape was unproven — with no further explanation. As might have been expected, the comrade who had made the accusation was extremely distressed.
‘The DC took a full two weeks to provide a statement. Yet the DC’s statement did not explain why it did not accept her account, or why it failed to make any criticism at all of the male comrade’s behaviour.'


Given the age of Miss X, it seems almost unbelievable that Martin Smith now runs 'Love Music, Hate Racism'. With its mission of putting on concerts in support of anti-racism, his new position will bring him into contact with large numbers of impressionable young girls - just like Miss X - while the apparatus of the SWP has already shown that it will do all it can to close down discussion of allegations against its leadership. At least two Central Committee members of the SWP were expelled following their attempts to challenge the findings of the Disputes Committeee.

To quote Tom Walker, a journalist who left the SWP over the handling of the matter,

"As those who raised criticisms pointed out, the disputes committee included five current or former CC members, and all have known comrade Smith for many years. Though I believe they took the case deeply seriously, this was not a jury of his peers, but a jury of his mates. If we were talking about any other organisation we would all consider it obvious that allowing it to investigate itself is unlikely to produce damning conclusions"

It is worth remembering that there are allegations that a further 9 rapes - including at least one other involving Smith - have been dealt with in a similar fashion, with the Disputes Committee dispensing 'revolutionary justice' in the form of expulsion or suspension from the SWP, in some cases for periods of up to two years. For any who feel that being made to temporarily leave a minor political party may not be a punishment which fits the crime of rape - which is a hate crime based on power - it may be worth asking why Hope not Hate feels no need to address such behaviour when they are supposedly opposed to inequality.

Thankfully, under Smiths' leadership the Love Music, Hate Racism campaign seems to have ground to a temporary halt: the last event listed on its website was last August, although the nature of the campaign means that there are often long hiatuses in its event schedule.

Should they start up again under Smiths' leadership, you may wish to ask yourself one thing before allowing your teenage daughters to attend an anti-racist event which sounds so worthy: the man behind it has been accused of rape, and has never faced justice because his friends in the anti-racist, anti-fascist movement whitewashed the allegations. Is this a person young girls should be around? You decide.