The Trial of Jez Turner: A Jewish Witch Hunt

August 7th, 2017

Awake Goy

By ANDREW JOYCE, PhD

Abridged by Lasha Darkmoon
from an article in The Occidental Observer,
with additional notes and comments by LD.

(A recent speech given by Jez Turner at the London Forum follows in a 27-minute video)

JEZ TURNER, British patriot and founder of the London Forum

. . . is to go on trial for “incitement to racial hatred” against Jews, despite having been given a clean bill of health several times by Britain’s Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). How is it possible that a man who has committed no crimes, according to Britain’s top lawyers, should be hauled before a court for his non-existent crimes? Read on to find out.

On July 4^th 2015 Jez Turner, along with fellow patriots, staged a static protest in Whitehall, opposite Downing Street, in protest at the development of the Shomrim (see picture above), a Jewish ‘defense’ group that possessed all the trappings of an illegal religious police force. During the protest, it has been alleged that Turner gave a speech in which he stated that:

“all politicians are nothing but a bunch of puppets dancing to a Jewish tune, and the ruling regimes in the West for the last one hundred years have danced to the same tune.”

Turner is also reported as having stated that Jews played an influential role in the French Revolution and both World Wars, before concluding that England was a content and successful nation during the period of the expulsion (1290–1656), and adding that we should “free England from Jewish control.”

Although the initial report to the police was made by the more senior Jewish organization, the Community Security Trust (CST), Gideon Falter, head of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, was the most vocal and ardent pursuer of the case.

The police, in accordance with established process for ‘hate crimes,’ passed footage of the speech to the Crown Prosecution Service’s counterterrorism division. It was here that Falter began to encounter difficulties, and why a further Jewish campaign to hinder free speech in Britain has acquired momentum in the last twelve months. While Leon Brittan’s inclusion of an ‘incitement to racial hatred’ clause in the 1986 Public Order Act was an important hit on free speech, it was not all-encompassing, and it did not come close to making ‘anti-Semitism’ illegal.

LD: Leon Brittan, a descendant of Lithuanian Jews, was a British politician whose original name was Leon Brittanisky. He died in 2015, having worked indefatigably right to the end of his life to promote Jewish interests over the interests of his family’s adopted country.

The Crown Prosecution Service’s policy guidelines on cases involving ‘incitement’ under the 1986 Act clearly state that the language employed by a defendant must have been “threatening, abusive or insulting. These words are given their normal meaning but the courts have ruled that behavior can be annoying, rude or even offensive without necessarily being insulting.”

Moreover, further comment from the CPS has made it clear that the language employed by the defendant must have been “grossly abusive or insulting” or moved beyond reasonable “criticism” of a group, for a prosecution to be valid, since “it is essential in a free, democratic and tolerant society that people are able robustly to exchange views, even when these may cause offence.” At some point in the aftermath of Falter’s report to the authorities, the CPS made the decision that Jez Turner hadn’t said anything illegal and ceased legal action against him.

Five months after the speech, Gideon Falter approached the Chief Crown Prosecutor for London with a view to discovering the charging decision in the case. He was informed by the CPS that Turner was entitled to free speech and hadn’t broken any laws.

Falter then attempted to request a Victim’s Right to Review, a request that was declined on the basis that Turner hadn’t mentioned Falter and therefore Falter couldn’t claim victim status.

Falter then used his influence to obtain meetings with both the Chief Executive of the CPS and the Director of Public Prosecutions, both of whom informed Falter that Turner simply hadn’t broken the law. At that point Falter, who has previously boasted of “holding the government’s feet to the fire,” issued legal proceedings against the CPS in his effort to make ‘anti-Semitism’ illegal, with or without legislation.

It is with all of this in mind that we need to reconsider some other recent developments, because other pawns have been put in place just prior to the latest twist in the Turner case — the ‘test case’ for the criminalization of criticism of Jewish influence in Britain. These pawns have consisted of two major propaganda drives, both of which have been largely led or orchestrated by Falter. The first drive has been a constant media droning about a putative, but somehow mysteriously invisible, “rise in anti-Semitism” in Britain.

Falter has been the chief author of this myth, writing in January 2015 of “Britain’s tsunami of anti-Semitism.” Falter’s ‘tsunami’ apparently consisted of a polling result in which 25% of British respondents replied positively to the statement: “Jews chase money more than other British people.”

Falter, who evidences almost psychopathic levels of paranoia, claimed that even though this much-feared anti-Semitism was ‘invisible,’ “the Jewish population must be protected by the state. … British people must remind their Jewish countrymen that they stand with us. Anti-Semitism in Britain is not a Jewish problem, it’s a British problem.” In a masterfully Jewish false syllogism, Falter added that: “Jews are the litmus test of freedom – our fate is the fate of society.”

GIDEON FALTER, head of Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA),
a group accused of being pro-Israel lobbyists fronting as a “charity“.

“. . . evidences almost psychopathic levels of paranoia.”

It is an unfortunate fact that the media and government have indulged the wanton paranoia of this individual and the group of fanatics that he leads.

Falter has not only been given meetings with those at the highest levels of government and law enforcement, but has even been allowed to put forward proposals that Jews be allowed to ‘educate’ police and prosecution lawyers on who, and for what comments, they should charge. We may consider it a paradox indeed, for an allegedly poor, downtrodden, and persecuted group to “hold the feet of the government to the fire.”

It was on the back of this ‘fake news’ of a rise in anti-Semitism that Falter produced another masterstroke in pushing the British government to adopt a ludicrously vague ‘official definition’ of anti-Semitism:

“Anti-Semitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

The significance of the adoption of this nonsensical statement had less to do with the definition itself, than it had to its part in the larger effort to criminalize criticism of Jews. Falter has complained that “our criminal justice system is failing badly,” by which he means that the criminal justice system is not fully serving Jewish interests.

With the media-invented frenzy about the ‘rise’ in anti-Semitism, and the introduction of a new definition of anti-Semitism, all that was needed for a final assault on the deficiencies of the 1986 Public Order Act was a test case in which a defendant had previously escaped prosecution under it.

Jez Turner was just such a defendant, and he has been selected by Jewish activists as the fulcrum on which the fate of free speech in Britain will turn. Just days ago, in an unprecedented eventuality, the Campaign Against Antisemitism’s legal team forced Britain’s Crown Prosecution Service to reconsider its decision not to prosecute. Falter gloated immediately that “their surrender was unequivocal.”

GLOATING:
‘Their surrender is unequivocal.”

The question remains for all freedom-loving Britons and for all men of the West where this warning sounds: Will you surrender? One person who won’t is Jez Turner himself. I met Jez in person a little over a year ago in Stockport, England, and found him to be an intelligent and affable gentleman. He is not given to extremes, and is often considered in his choice of words and actions. We discussed history and politics over fish and chips, and literature during one (very windy) walk along the coast.

A very talented speaker and organizer, Jez has given a lot to the cause in England, and has done so during periods where others have taken a back seat. In particular, his London Forum has been the lifeblood of the movement in Britain during the last several years. All of this, of course, makes him a valuable ‘scalp’ to our opponents, and the ideal target upon which to base the broader assault on free speech.

Despite the fact that a courtroom beckons, Jez remains in good spirits. In my last correspondence with him he had this to say — clearly anticipating a courtroom battle over the extent of Jewish influence in Britain. I can think of no better way to finish: “Our job is to get the truth out there in whatever way possible and a court room is a good a place as any.”

[LD] Andrew Joyce observes in a footnote: “The Campaign Against Antisemitism is likely to be funded by George Soros. Tony Greenstein, an anti-Zionist Jew, is attempting to get the CAA de-registered as a charity.”

Donors’ names are concealed and there is no attempt at transparency.

Jez Turner, founder of the Nationalist organization known as the London Forum, was educated at a prestigious English public school called Giggleswick. He then graduated from the University of Essex and the London School of Economics. The London Forum has attracted a gallery of stellar speakers who have all in some way offended the Establishment and acquired a certain notoriety: David Irving, Kevin MacDonald, Mark Weber, Jared Taylor, Alexandr Dugin, Alain de Benoist, and Lady Michele Renouf. The word “anti-Semitism” has often been bandied around irresponsibly in connection with these enormously gifted and well-respected political dissidents.

If the Jewish witch hunt against Jez Turner should succeed, it would be a major miscarriage of justice.

Bear in mind that the Crown Prosecution Service has already told Gideon Falter—not once, but several times—that Jez Turner has committed no crime. If Jez is now found “guilty” on some trumped-up charge, the Crown Prosecution Service will not only lose all credibility but the world will see for itself that Jez was right all along when he allegedly said: “All politicians are nothing but a bunch of puppets dancing to a Jewish tune.” [LD]